Dark Model Adaptation: Semantic Image Segmentation from Daytime to Nighttime
Open accessAbstract
This work addresses the problem of semantic image segmentation of nighttime scenes.Although considerable progress has been made in semantic image segmentation, it is mainly related to daytime scenarios.This paper proposes a novel method to progressive adapt the semantic models trained on daytime scenes, along with large-scale annotations therein, to nighttime scenes via the bridge of twilight time -the time between dawn and sunrise, or between sunset and dusk.The goal of the method is to alleviate the cost of human annotation for nighttime images by transferring knowledge from standard daytime conditions.In addition to the method, a new dataset of road scenes is compiled; it consists of 35,000 images ranging from daytime to twilight time and to nighttime.Also, a subset of the nighttime images are densely annotated for method evaluation.Our experiments show that our method is effective for knowledge transfer from daytime scenes to nighttime scenes, without using extra human annotation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Our findings on BDD100K contrast with previous findings that other tasks, such as object detection and segmentation, can suffer under the same types of shifts on the same dataset.
“Our findings contrast with previous findings that other tasks, such as object detection and segmentation, can suffer under the same types of shifts on the same dataset (Yu et al., 2020; Dai and Van Gool, 2018).”
From WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts (2020) · cites this paper as Dai and Van Gool, 2018
Prior work showed worse test performance for segmentation and detection tasks on non-daytime images.
“We contrast this with findings from Dai and Van Gool (2018); Yu et al. (2020), who showed worse test performance for segmentation and detection tasks, respectively, on non daytime images.”
From WILDS: A Benchmark of in-the-Wild Distribution Shifts (2020) · cites this paper as Dai and Van Gool (2018)
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 23 · Cited by 60
- Authors
- Dai, D., & Van Gool, L.
- Affiliations
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- ORCID
- Dai, Dengxin
- Venue
- ETH Zurich
- Publisher
- ETH Zurich
- Published
- 2018
- Pages
- 3819-3824
- OpenAlex
- W2895777173
- Cited by
- 60
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 4.98
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- other-oa
- Locations
- Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- ETH Zürich Research Collection
- Funders
- Toyota Motor Europe
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Civil and Structural Engineering › Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
- Keywords
- semantic segmentation, twilight, domain adaptation, knowledge transfer, annotation cost reduction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review