Encoder-Decoder with Atrous Separable Convolution for Semantic Image Segmentation
Open accessAbstract
Spatial pyramid pooling module or encode-decoder structure are used in deep neural networks for semantic segmentation task. The former networks are able to encode multi-scale contextual information by probing the incoming features with filters or pooling operations at multiple rates and multiple effective fields-of-view, while the latter networks can capture sharper object boundaries by gradually recovering the spatial information. In this work, we propose to combine the advantages from both methods. Specifically, our proposed model, DeepLabv3+, extends DeepLabv3 by adding a simple yet effective decoder module to refine the segmentation results especially along object boundaries. We further explore the Xception model and apply the depthwise separable convolution to both Atrous Spatial Pyramid Pooling and decoder modules, resulting in a faster and stronger encoder-decoder network. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model on PASCAL VOC 2012 and Cityscapes datasets, achieving the test set performance of 89.0\% and 82.1\% without any post-processing. Our paper is accompanied with a publicly available reference implementation of the proposed models in Tensorflow at \url{https://github.com/tensorflow/models/tree/master/research/deeplab}.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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?
High-accuracy semantic segmentation methods have large parameter counts, e.g., DFN 44.8 M, DeepLabv3+ 54.6 M, and DenseASPP 28.6 M.
“DFN [36] of 44.8 M, DeepLabv3+ [10] of 54.6 M and DenseASPP [34] of 28.6 M.”
From CGNet: A Light-Weight Context Guided Network for Semantic Segmentation (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 90 · Cited by 20,063
- Authors
- Chen, L.-C., Zhu, Y., Papandreou, G., Schroff, F., & Adam, H.
- Affiliations
- Google (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chen, Liang-Chieh
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2018
- Pages
- 833-851
- ISSN
- 0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1802.02611
- OpenAlex
- W2964309882
- Cited by
- 20,063
- References
- 90
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2319 · 2025: 3444 · 2024: 3715 · 2023: 3223 · 2022: 2689 · 2021: 2194 · 2020: 1508 · 2019: 839 · 2018: 127 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 351.81
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Lecture notes in computer science (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 › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
- Keywords
- semantic segmentation, DeepLabV3+, atrous spatial pyramid pooling, encoder-decoder architecture, depthwise separable convolution, Xception, object boundary refinement, multi-scale contextual information, Pascal VOC 2012, cityscape
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