CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 19,015Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningMachine Learning and Data Classification

MobileNets: Efficient Convolutional Neural Networks for Mobile Vision Applications

Open access
Howard, Andrew G., Zhu, Menglong, Chen, Bo, Kalenichenko, Dmitry, Wang, Weijun, Weyand, Tobias, Andreetto, Marco, Adam, Hartwig·2017·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1704.04861arXiv 1704.04861
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We present a class of efficient models called MobileNets for mobile and embedded vision applications. MobileNets are based on a streamlined architecture that uses depth-wise separable convolutions to build light weight deep neural networks. We introduce two simple global hyper-parameters that efficiently trade off between latency and accuracy. These hyper-parameters allow the model builder to choose the right sized model for their application based on the constraints of the problem. We present extensive experiments on resource and accuracy tradeoffs and show strong performance compared to other popular models on ImageNet classification. We then demonstrate the effectiveness of MobileNets across a wide range of applications and use cases including object detection, finegrain classification, face attributes and large scale geo-localization.

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.1704.04861

Cites

5 of 5 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?

  • Recent work has shown that low precision and mixed-precision quantization with INT4 or INT8 works in practice.

    “Recent work has shown that low precision and mixed-precision quantization with INT4/INT8 works in practice [51,82,102,108,187,199,211,239,246,246,249,263,267,286].”

    From A Survey of Quantization Methods for Efficient Neural Network Inference (2022) · cites this paper as [102]

    The Prior Work section (p. 1) identifies quantization as a compression approach and low-bit networks as an emerging approach. It does not report that mixed-precision INT4/INT8 quantization works in practice; the paper's experiments concern MobileNet architecture and model shrinking, not those precision settings. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Experimental tests showed SSD has good performance compared to Faster R-CNN and R-FCN detectors.

    “Experimental tests showed that the SSD framework [82] has good performance compared to Faster R-CNN [84] and Region-based Fully Convolutional Network (R-FCN) [111] detectors.”

    From A Systematic Review of Drone Based Road Traffic Monitoring System (2022) · cites this paper as [111]

    Section 4.6 (p. 7) reports experimental COCO results comparing SSD with Faster R-CNN; Table 13 shows SSD achieves comparable detection accuracy with substantially fewer computations in the reported configurations. The paper does not compare SSD with R-FCN, so that part of the claim is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The depth-wise separable convolution idea has been recently applied to object detection and fine-grain classification.

    “This idea has been recently applied to object detection and fine-grain classification [143-145].”

    From Object Detection in 20 Years: A Survey (2023) · cites this paper as [143]

  • Lightweight models such as MobileNet and ShuffleNet, although optimized in computation and model size, are often inferior to full-size models in detection accuracy.

    “Lightweight models, such as MobileNet [4] and ShuffleNet [5], although optimized in terms of computation and model size, are often inferior to full-size models in terms of detection accuracy.”

    From Cloud-Edge Collaborative Defect Detection Based on Efficient Yolo Networks and Incremental Learning (2024) · cites this paper as [4]

  • Qin et al. (2018) show that Depthwise 3x3 Convolutions comprised just 3.06% of an example network's Multiply-Add operations, while utilizing 82.86% of the total training time in the FPO-efficient MobileNet architecture.

    “Similarly, Qin et al. (2018) show how Depthwise 3x3 Convolutions comprised just 3.06% of an example network's Multiply-Add operations, while utilizing 82.86% of the total training time in the FPO-efficient MobileNet architecture Howard et al. (2017).”

    From Towards the Systematic Reporting of the Energy and Carbon Footprints of Machine Learning (2020) · cites this paper as Howard et al. (2017)

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: 31

  1. [3][3] F. Chollet. Xception: Deep learning with depthwise separable convolutions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1610.02357v2 , 2016. 1 - · arXiv
  2. [4][4] M. Courbariaux, J.-P. David, and Y. Bengio. Training deep neural networks with low precision multiplications. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.7024 , 2014. 2 - · arXiv
  3. [5][5] S. Han, H. Mao, and W. J. Dally. Deep compression: Compressing deep neural network with pruning, trained quantization and huffman coding. CoRR, abs/1510.00149 , 2, 2015. 2 - · arXiv
  4. [6][6] J. Hays and A. Efros. IM2GPS: estimating geographic information from a single image. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2008. 7 -
  5. [7][7] J. Hays and A. Efros. Large-Scale Image Geolocalization. In J. Choi and G. Friedland, editors, Multimodal Location Estimation of Videos and Images . Springer, 2014. 6, 7 -
  6. [9][9] G. Hinton, O. Vinyals, and J. Dean. Distilling the knowledge in a neural network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.02531 , 2015. 2, 7 - · arXiv
  7. [10][10] J. Huang, V. Rathod, C. Sun, M. Zhu, A. Korattikara, A. Fathi, I. Fischer, Z. Wojna, Y . Song, S. Guadarrama, et al. Speed/accuracy trade-offs for modern convolutional object detectors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.10012 , 2016. 7 - · arXiv
  8. [11][11] I. Hubara, M. Courbariaux, D. Soudry, R. El-Yaniv, and Y. Bengio. Quantized neural networks: Training neural networks with low precision weights and activations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1609.07061 , 2016. 2 - · arXiv
  9. [12][12] F. N. Iandola, M. W. Moskewicz, K. Ashraf, S. Han, W. J. Dally, and K. Keutzer. Squeezenet: Alexnet-level accuracy with 50x fewer parameters and¡ 1mb model size. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.07360 , 2016. 1, 6 - · arXiv
  10. [13][13] S. Ioffe and C. Szegedy. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03167 , 2015. 1, 3, 7 - · arXiv
  11. [14][14] M. Jaderberg, A. Vedaldi, and A. Zisserman. Speeding up convolutional neural networks with low rank expansions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1405.3866 , 2014. 2 - · arXiv
  12. [15][15] Y. Jia, E. Shelhamer, J. Donahue, S. Karayev, J. Long, R. Girshick, S. Guadarrama, and T. Darrell. Caffe: Convolutional architecture for fast feature embedding. arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.5093 , 2014. 4 - · arXiv
  13. [16][16] J. Jin, A. Dundar, and E. Culurciello. Flattened convolutional neural networks for feedforward acceleration. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.5474 , 2014. 1, 3 - · arXiv
  14. [17][17] A. Khosla, N. Jayadevaprakash, B. Yao, and L. Fei-Fei. Novel dataset for fine-grained image categorization. In First Workshop on Fine-Grained Visual Categorization, IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , Colorado Springs, CO, June 2011. 6 -
  15. [18][18] J. Krause, B. Sapp, A. Howard, H. Zhou, A. Toshev, T. Duerig, J. Philbin, and L. Fei-Fei. The unreasonable effectiveness of noisy data for fine-grained recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.06789 , 2015. 6 - · arXiv
  16. [19][19] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems , pages 1097-1105, 2012. 1, 6 -
  17. [20][20] V. Lebedev, Y. Ganin, M. Rakhuba, I. Oseledets, and V. Lempitsky. Speeding-up convolutional neural networks using fine-tuned cp-decomposition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6553 , 2014. 2 - · arXiv
  18. [21][21] W. Liu, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, C. Szegedy, and S. Reed. Ssd: Single shot multibox detector. arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.02325 , 2015. 7 - · arXiv
  19. [22][22] M. Rastegari, V. Ordonez, J. Redmon, and A. Farhadi. Xnornet: Imagenet classification using binary convolutional neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.05279 , 2016. 1, 2 - · arXiv
  20. [23][23] S. Ren, K. He, R. Girshick, and J. Sun. Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems , pages 91-99, 2015. 7 -
  21. [26][26] L. Sifre. Rigid-motion scattering for image classification . PhD thesis, Ph. D. thesis, 2014. 1, 3 -
  22. [27][27] K. Simonyan and A. Zisserman. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556 , 2014. 1, 6 - · arXiv
  23. [28][28] V. Sindhwani, T. Sainath, and S. Kumar. Structured transforms for small-footprint deep learning. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , pages 3088-3096, 2015. 1 -
  24. [30][30] C. Szegedy, W. Liu, Y. Jia, P. Sermanet, S. Reed, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, V. Vanhoucke, and A. Rabinovich. Going deeper with convolutions. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 1-9, 2015. 6 -
  25. [31][31] C. Szegedy, V. Vanhoucke, S. Ioffe, J. Shlens, and Z. Wojna. Rethinking the inception architecture for computer vision. arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.00567 , 2015. 1, 3, 4, 7 - · arXiv
  26. [32][32] B. Thomee, D. A. Shamma, G. Friedland, B. Elizalde, K. Ni, D. Poland, D. Borth, and L.-J. Li. Yfcc100m: The new data in multimedia research. Communications of the ACM , 59(2):64-73, 2016. 7 -
  27. [33][33] T. Tieleman and G. Hinton. Lecture 6.5-rmsprop: Divide the gradient by a running average of its recent magnitude. COURSERA: Neural Networks for Machine Learning , 4(2), 2012. 4 -
  28. [34][34] M. Wang, B. Liu, and H. Foroosh. Factorized convolutional neural networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.04337 , 2016. 1 - · arXiv
  29. [35][35] T. Weyand, I. Kostrikov, and J. Philbin. PlaNet - Photo Geolocation with Convolutional Neural Networks. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) , 2016. 6, 7 -
  30. [36][36] J. Wu, C. Leng, Y. Wang, Q. Hu, and J. Cheng. Quantized convolutional neural networks for mobile devices. arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.06473 , 2015. 1 - · arXiv
  31. [37][37] Z. Yang, M. Moczulski, M. Denil, N. de Freitas, A. Smola, L. Song, and Z. Wang. Deep fried convnets. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 1476-1483, 2015. 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Howard, A. G., Zhu, M., Chen, B., Kalenichenko, D., Wang, W., Weyand, T., Andreetto, M., & Adam, H.
Affiliations
Google (United States) (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2017
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1704.04861
arXiv
1704.04861
OpenAlex
W2612445135
Cited by
19,015
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 239 · 2025: 1584 · 2024: 2760 · 2023: 2911 · 2022: 2524 · 2021: 3414 · 2020: 2734 · 2019: 1927 · 2018: 833 · 2017: 74 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
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 › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
Keywords
MobileNet, depthwise separable convolution, lightweight neural networks, embedded vision, accuracy-latency trade-off, ImageNet classification, object detection, fine-grained classification, geolocation

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