CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 4,196Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition

Open access
He, Kaiming, Zhang, Xiangyu, Ren, Shaoqing, Sun, Jian·2015·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1512.03385arXiv 1512.03385
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Deeper neural networks are more difficult to train. We present a residual learning framework to ease the training of networks that are substantially deeper than those used previously. We explicitly reformulate the layers as learning residual functions with reference to the layer inputs, instead of learning unreferenced functions. We provide comprehensive empirical evidence showing that these residual networks are easier to optimize, and can gain accuracy from considerably increased depth. On the ImageNet dataset we evaluate residual nets with a depth of up to 152 layers---8x deeper than VGG nets but still having lower complexity. An ensemble of these residual nets achieves 3.57% error on the ImageNet test set. This result won the 1st place on the ILSVRC 2015 classification task. We also present analysis on CIFAR-10 with 100 and 1000 layers. The depth of representations is of central importance for many visual recognition tasks. Solely due to our extremely deep representations, we obtain a 28% relative improvement on the COCO object detection dataset. Deep residual nets are foundations of our submissions to ILSVRC & COCO 2015 competitions, where we also won the 1st places on the tasks of ImageNet detection, ImageNet localization, COCO detection, and COCO segmentation.

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.1512.03385

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • ResNet-50 is a deep neural network with 50 layers that can mitigate vanishing and exploding gradient problems through a deep residual learning framework and residual mapping technique.

    “ResNet-50 is a deep neural network with 50 layers, which can mitigate the vanishing and exploding gradient problems that are commonly encountered in substantially deeper neural networks through the utilization of a deep residual learning framework and residual mapping technique.”

    From SAFER: Situation Aware Facial Emotion Recognition (2023) · cites this paper as [36]

    The paper identifies ResNet-50 as a 50-layer residual network and describes residual mappings as a way to ease optimization (Introduction, pp. 1–2; ImageNet Classification, p. 6). It does not attribute that benefit to mitigating vanishing or exploding gradients: the Introduction (p. 1) says those problems had largely been addressed by initialization and normalization, and ImageNet Classification (p. 5) says the observed optimization difficulty was unlikely to be caused by vanishing gradients. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In ILSVRC and COCO 2015 competitions, Faster R-CNN and RPN are the basis of several 1st-place entries in the tracks of ImageNet detection, ImageNet localization, COCO detection, and COCO segmentation.

    “In ILSVRC and COCO 2015 competitions, Faster R-CNN and RPN are the basis of several 1st-place entries [18] in the tracks of ImageNet detection, ImageNet localization, COCO detection, and COCO segmentation.”

    From Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

    Section 4.3 (p. 8) lists first-place finishes in all four tracks, and the Object Detection Baselines (p. 10) describe a Faster R-CNN system using an RPN. The ImageNet Localization section (p. 12) also identifies its RPN-based method. But the copy attributes the entries collectively to deep residual nets; it does not establish that Faster R-CNN and RPN underpinned the COCO segmentation entry. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • CNNs have grown due in part to their success in many challenging image classification problems, surpassing methods relying on hand-crafted features.

    “the use of deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) has grown due in part to their success in many challenging image classification problems [15-19], surpassing methods relying on hand-crafted features”

    From EEGNet: a compact convolutional neural network for EEG-based brain-computer interfaces (2018) · cites this paper as [18]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says CNNs produced breakthroughs in image classification and achieved leading results on the challenging ImageNet dataset, supporting the claim about their success. Our copy does not establish that CNNs surpassed methods relying on hand-crafted features; a search for that comparison found no supporting passage. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The same system [18] also won the 1st place in the ILSVRC 2015 object detection competition, surpassing the second place by absolute 8.5%.

    “The same system [18] also won the 1st place in the ILSVRC 2015 object detection competition, surpassing the second place by absolute 8.5%.”

    From Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

  • Only by replacing VGG-16 with a 101-layer residual net (ResNet-101), the Faster R-CNN system increases the mAP from 41.5%/21.2% (VGG16) to 48.4%/27.2% (ResNet-101) on the COCO val set.

    “Only by replacing VGG-16 with a 101layer residual net (ResNet-101) [18], the Faster R-CNN system increases the mAP from 41.5%/21.2% (VGG16) to 48.4%/27.2% (ResNet-101) on the COCO val set.”

    From Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks (2017) · cites this paper as [18]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [7][7] R. Girshick. Fast R-CNN. In ICCV , 2015. -
  2. [40][40] 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. -

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J.
Affiliations
Microsoft (United States) (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2015
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1512.03385
arXiv
1512.03385
OpenAlex
W2949650786
Cited by
4,196
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 230 · 2025: 339 · 2024: 371 · 2023: 338 · 2022: 177 · 2021: 659 · 2020: 605 · 2019: 529 · 2018: 479 · 2017: 334 · 2016: 131 · 2015: 4
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • 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 › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Keywords
ResNet, image recognition, convolutional neural networks, reading lists

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