CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 454Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Object Detection Networks on Convolutional Feature Maps

Open access
Ren, Shaoqing, He, Kaiming, Girshick, Ross, Zhang, Xiangyu, Sun, Jian·2015·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1504.06066arXiv 1504.06066
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Most object detectors contain two important components: a feature extractor and an object classifier. The feature extractor has rapidly evolved with significant research efforts leading to better deep convolutional architectures. The object classifier, however, has not received much attention and many recent systems (like SPPnet and Fast/Faster R-CNN) use simple multi-layer perceptrons. This paper demonstrates that carefully designing deep networks for object classification is just as important. We experiment with region-wise classifier networks that use shared, region-independent convolutional features. We call them "Networks on Convolutional feature maps" (NoCs). We discover that aside from deep feature maps, a deep and convolutional per-region classifier is of particular importance for object detection, whereas latest superior image classification models (such as ResNets and GoogLeNets) do not directly lead to good detection accuracy without using such a per-region classifier. We show by experiments that despite the effective ResNets and Faster R-CNN systems, the design of NoCs is an essential element for the 1st-place winning entries in ImageNet and MS COCO challenges 2015.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1504.06066

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • R-CNN minus R takes a significant accuracy hit from not having good proposals.

    “While it is much faster than R-CNN, it still falls short of real-time and takes a significant accuracy hit from not having good proposals.”

    From You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection (2016) · cites this paper as [20]

    The “ConvNet-based Object Detection” section (page unavailable) says R-CNN minus R uses predefined regions instead of region proposals. It does not say that this causes a significant accuracy loss; the paper’s discussion of low accuracy concerns a different system, naïve Faster R-CNN. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Adding both convolutional and connected layers to pretrained networks can improve performance.

    “Ren et al. show that adding both convolutional and connected layers to pretrained networks can improve performance [29].”

    From You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection (2016) · cites this paper as [29]

  • R-CNN minus R replaces Selective Search with static bounding box proposals.

    “R-CNN minus R replaces Selective Search with static bounding box proposals [20].”

    From You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection (2016) · cites this paper as [20]

  • R-CNN minus R is much faster than R-CNN.

    “While it is much faster than R-CNN, it still falls short of real-time and takes a significant accuracy hit from not having good proposals.”

    From You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection (2016) · cites this paper as [20]

    The ConvNet-based Object Detection section identifies R-CNN minus R and says it uses predefined regions in an SPPnet system, but gives no speed comparison with R-CNN. A search for R-CNN minus R and speed found no passage in our copy establishing that it is much faster. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • R-CNN minus R falls short of real-time.

    “While it is much faster than R-CNN, it still falls short of real-time and takes a significant accuracy hit from not having good proposals.”

    From You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection (2016) · cites this paper as [20]

    The ConvNet-based Object Detection section identifies R-CNN minus R as a method that uses predefined regions instead of region proposals. It gives no runtime measurement or assessment of whether the method achieves real-time detection; searches for real-time performance and speed did not establish that claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 53 · Cited by 454

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. P. F. Felzenszwalb, R. B. Girshick, D. McAllester, and D. Ra- manan, "Object detection with discriminatively trained part- based models," TPAMI, 2010.
  2. X. Wang, M. Yang, S. Zhu, and Y. Lin, "Regionlets for generic object detection," in ICCV, 2013.
  3. J. R. Uijlings, K. E. van de Sande, T. Gevers, and A. W. Smeulders, "Selective search for object recognition," IJCV, 2013.
  4. A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. Hinton, "Imagenet classi- fication with deep convolutional neural networks," in NIPS, 2012.
  5. R. Girshick, J. Donahue, T. Darrell, and J. Malik, "Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmen- tation," in CVPR, 2014.
  6. J. Deng, W. Dong, R. Socher, L.-J. Li, K. Li, and L. Fei- Fei, "Imagenet: A large-scale hierarchical image database," in CVPR, 2009.
  7. P.-A. Savalle, S. Tsogkas, G. Papandreou, and I. Kokkinos, "Deformable part models with CNN features," in Parts and Attributes Workshop, ECCV, 2014.
  8. R. Girshick, F. Iandola, T. Darrell, and J. Malik, "Deformable part models are convolutional neural networks," in CVPR, 2015.
  9. L. Wan, D. Eigen, and R. Fergus, "End-to-end integration of a convolutional network, deformable parts model and non- maximum suppression," in CVPR, 2015.
  10. W. Y. Zou, X. Wang, M. Sun, and Y. Lin, "Generic object de- tection with dense neural patterns and regionlets," in BMVC, 2014.
  11. K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, "Spatial pyramid pooling in deep convolutional networks for visual recognition," in ECCV, 2014.
  12. R. Girshick, "Fast R-CNN," in ICCV, 2015.
  13. S. Ren, K. He, R. Girshick, and J. Sun, "Faster R-CNN: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks," in NIPS, 2015.
  14. K. Simonyan and A. Zisserman, "Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition," in ICLR, 2015.
  15. I. J. Goodfellow, D. Warde-Farley, M. Mirza, A. Courville, and Y. Bengio, "Maxout networks," arXiv:1302.4389, 2013. · arXiv
  16. K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, "Deep residual learning for image recognition," in arXiv prepring arXiv:1506.01497, 2015. · arXiv
  17. C. Szegedy, W. Liu, Y. Jia, P. Sermanet, S. Reed, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, and A. Rabinovich, "Going deeper with convolutions," Tech. Rep., 2014. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.4842v1 · arXiv
  18. P. Viola and M. Jones, "Rapid object detection using a boosted cascade of simple features," in CVPR, 2001.
  19. S. Lazebnik, C. Schmid, and J. Ponce, "Beyond bags of fea- tures: Spatial pyramid matching for recognizing natural scene categories," in CVPR, 2006.
  20. P. Sermanet, D. Eigen, X. Zhang, M. Mathieu, R. Fergus, and Y. LeCun, "Overfeat: Integrated recognition, localization and detection using convolutional networks," in ICLR, 2014.
  21. K. Lenc and A. Vedaldi, "R-cnn minus r," in BMVC, 2015.
  22. S. Gidaris and N. Komodakis, "Object detection via a multi- region & semantic segmentation-aware cnn model," in ICCV, 2015.
  23. M. D. Zeiler and R. Fergus, "Visualizing and understanding convolutional neural networks," in ECCV, 2014.
  24. M. Everingham, L. Van Gool, C. K. Williams, J. Winn, and A. Zisserman, "The PASCAL Visual Object Classes (VOC) Challenge," IJCV, 2010.
  25. P. Agrawal, R. Girshick, and J. Malik, "Analyzing the perfor- mance of multilayer neural networks for object recognition," in ECCV, 2014.
  26. V. Nair and G. E. Hinton, "Rectified linear units improve restricted boltzmann machines," in ICML, 2010.
  27. D. Hoiem, Y. Chodpathumwan, and Q. Dai, "Diagnosing error in object detectors," in ECCV, 2012.
  28. T.-Y. Lin, M. Maire, S. Belongie, J. Hays, P. Perona, D. Ra- manan, P. Dollár, and C. L. Zitnick, "Microsoft coco: Common objects in context," arXiv:1405.0312, 2014. · arXiv
  29. S. Ioffe and C. Szegedy, "Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift," in ICML, 2015.
  30. J. Long, E. Shelhamer, and T. Darrell, "Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation," in CVPR, 2015.
  31. L.-C. Chen, G. Papandreou, I. Kokkinos, K. Murphy, and A. L. Yuille, "Semantic image segmentation with deep convolutional nets and fully connected crfs," in ICLR, 2015.
  32. S. Mallat, A wavelet tour of signal processing. Academic press, 1999.

Authors
Ren, S., He, K., Girshick, R., Zhang, X., & Sun, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Science and Technology of China (CN)
  • Meta (United States) (US)
  • Xi'an Jiaotong University (CN)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2015
Volume
39
Issue
7
Pages
1476-1481
ISSN
0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1504.06066
arXiv
1504.06066
OpenAlex
W2117287331
Cited by
454
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 64 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 76 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 4
FWCI
42.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
object detection, object classification, Faster R-CNN, ResNet, GoogLeNet, feature extractor, MS COCO, ImageNet

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