The DOI matches its DataCite record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
YOLOv3: An Incremental Improvement
Open accessAbstract
We present some updates to YOLO! We made a bunch of little design changes to make it better. We also trained this new network that's pretty swell. It's a little bigger than last time but more accurate. It's still fast though, don't worry. At 320x320 YOLOv3 runs in 22 ms at 28.2 mAP, as accurate as SSD but three times faster. When we look at the old .5 IOU mAP detection metric YOLOv3 is quite good. It achieves 57.9 mAP@50 in 51 ms on a Titan X, compared to 57.5 mAP@50 in 198 ms by RetinaNet, similar performance but 3.8x faster. As always, all the code is online at https://pjreddie.com/yolo/
Overview
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
Verification
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?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“outperforming previous best detector [45] by 4 AP while being 2.7x smaller and using 7.4x fewer FLOPs.”
From EfficientDet: Scalable and Efficient Object Detection (2019) · cites this paper as [45]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In general, the analyses show that the YOLO family [52,71,104,112] of network architectures and MobileNet and its derivative-based [40,53] and EfficientNet-Lite [56] backbones are very suitable for deployment with a lower number of parameters while retaining higher performance.”
From A survey on deep learning-based monocular spacecraft pose estimation: Current state, limitations and prospects (2023) · cites this paper as [104]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Later, CE loss (CrossEntropy) is typically used [21, 23, 47].”
From Object Detection in 20 Years: A Survey (2023) · cites this paper as [21]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“On relatively low-accuracy regime, our EfficientDet-D0 achieves similar accuracy as YOLOv3 with 28x fewer FLOPs.”
From EfficientDet: Scalable and Efficient Object Detection (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“When applying the proposed quantization method to representative one-stage object detectors, You Only Look Once v3 and v4 (YOLOv3 and YOLOv4), detection accuracy similar to the original networks ( i.e. , YOLOv3 and YOLOv4) with a single-precision oating-point format (32-bit) is maintained despite expressing weights with only about 20% of the bits compared to a single-precision oating-point”
From Zero-Centered Fixed-Point Quantization With Iterative Retraining for Deep Convolutional Neural Network-Based Object Detectors (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“YOLOv3 [33], addressed the shortcomings observed in its predecessors by concentrating on rectifying localisation errors and optimising detection efficiency, particularly for smaller objects.”
From YOLOv1 to v8: Unveiling Each Variant–A Comprehensive Review of YOLO (2024) · cites this paper as [33]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The third version of YOLO tries to overcome aforementioned drawbacks and provides an efficient way for detecting objects with an improved performance while trained and evaluated on the COCO dataset [55].”
From Object detection using YOLO: challenges, architectural successors, datasets and applications (2023) · cites this paper as [55]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Under similar accuracy constraint, our EfficientDet uses 28x fewer FLOPs than YOLOv3 [34], 30x fewer FLOPs than RetinaNet [24], and 19x fewer FLOPs than the recent ResNet based NAS-FPN [10].”
From EfficientDet: Scalable and Efficient Object Detection (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“On high-accuracy regime, our EfficientDet also consistently outperforms recent object detectors [10, 45] with much fewer parameters and FLOPs.”
From EfficientDet: Scalable and Efficient Object Detection (2019) · cites this paper as [45]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“the YOLO series models v2-v5 [144-147] are some of the most advanced object detection methods based on DNN, which have good performance in terms of speed and precision.”
From A survey of model compression strategies for object detection (2023) · cites this paper as [146]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The proposed technique can be easily applied to various object detectors including YOLOv3 [10] and YOLOv4 [11].”
From Zero-Centered Fixed-Point Quantization With Iterative Retraining for Deep Convolutional Neural Network-Based Object Detectors (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The proposed technique can be easily applied to various object detectors including YOLOv3 [10] and YOLOv4 [11].”
From Zero-Centered Fixed-Point Quantization With Iterative Retraining for Deep Convolutional Neural Network-Based Object Detectors (2021) · cites this paper as [11]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, [73] used Faster R-CNN [84] and YOLOv3 [25] to detect cars for traffic monitoring purpose.”
From A Systematic Review of Drone Based Road Traffic Monitoring System (2022) · cites this paper as [25]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Results increased over base YOLOv3 [25], Faster R-CNN [84] and SSD [82] frameworks.”
From A Systematic Review of Drone Based Road Traffic Monitoring System (2022) · cites this paper as [25]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Nonetheless, this strategy provides scarce performance when compared with SSD [82], You Only Look Once (YOLO)9000 [83], and YOLOv3 [25] frameworks.”
From A Systematic Review of Drone Based Road Traffic Monitoring System (2022) · cites this paper as [25]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The OD approaches most explored seem to be those that emerged from the beginning (year 2015) such as YOLO versions [23-26], SSD [27], and Faster R-CNN [33].”
From Ten Years of Active Learning Techniques and Object Detection: A Systematic Review (2023) · cites this paper as [25]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Compared to other algorithms, YOLO V3 offers a good equilibrium between speed and accuracy and can detect objects at three different scales.”
From Edge-Computing Video Analytics for Real-Time Traffic Monitoring in a Smart City (2019) · cites this paper as [37]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“For example, the latest AmoebaNet-based NASFPN detector [45] requires 167M parameters and 3045B FLOPs (30x more than RetinaNet [24]) to achieve state-ofthe-art accuracy.”
From EfficientDet: Scalable and Efficient Object Detection (2019) · cites this paper as [45]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Compared to YOLOv3-tiny [10], Gaussian YOLOv3-tiny [13], and Nayak et al. [41], the weight size of the proposed network is approximately one-third larger, but the mAP of the proposed network is much higher than that of YOLOv3-tiny [10], Gaussian YOLOv3-tiny [13], and Nayak et al. [41] by 21.42, 15.22, and 26.43, respectively.”
From Zero-Centered Fixed-Point Quantization With Iterative Retraining for Deep Convolutional Neural Network-Based Object Detectors (2021) · cites this paper as [10]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“In addition, high dimensional images, like X-rays and CT images, can be detected by 3D CNN.”
From A Survey of Convolutional Neural Networks: Analysis, Applications, and Prospects (2022) · cites this paper as [156]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“We evaluate its latest extension YOLOv3 [34], as in comparison with its predecessors, its design is promising regarding the detection of smaller objects.”
From EuroCity Persons: A Novel Benchmark for Person Detection in Traffic Scenes (2019) · cites this paper as [34]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networks
Ren, S., He, K., Girshick, R., & Sun, J. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.01497 · Cited by 70,812
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1512.03385 · Cited by 4,196
Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection
Lin, T.-Y., Goyal, P., Girshick, R., He, K., & Dollár, P. (2017) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1708.02002 · Cited by 1,227
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- [2][2] M. Everingham, L. Van Gool, C. K. Williams, J. Winn, and A. Zisserman. The pascal visual object classes (voc) challenge. International journal of computer vision , 88(2):303338, 2010. 6 -
- [3][3] C.-Y. Fu, W. Liu, A. Ranga, A. Tyagi, and A. C. Berg. Dssd: Deconvolutional single shot detector. arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.06659 , 2017. 3 - · arXiv
- [4][4] D. Gordon, A. Kembhavi, M. Rastegari, J. Redmon, D. Fox, and A. Farhadi. Iqa: Visual question answering in interactive environments. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.03316 , 2017. 1 - · arXiv
- [8][8] T.-Y. Lin, P. Dollar, R. Girshick, K. He, B. Hariharan, and S. Belongie. Feature pyramid networks for object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 2117-2125, 2017. 2, 3 -
- [10][10] T.-Y. Lin, M. Maire, S. Belongie, J. Hays, P. Perona, D. Ramanan, P. Doll´ ar, and C. L. Zitnick. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In European conference on computer vision , pages 740-755. Springer, 2014. 2 -
- [11][11] W. Liu, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, C. Szegedy, S. Reed, C.Y. Fu, and A. C. Berg. Ssd: Single shot multibox detector. In European conference on computer vision , pages 21-37. Springer, 2016. 3 -
- [15][15] J. Redmon and A. Farhadi. Yolo9000: Better, faster, stronger. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2017 IEEE Conference on , pages 6517-6525. IEEE, 2017. 1, 2, 3 -
- [16][16] J. Redmon and A. Farhadi. Yolov3: An incremental improvement. arXiv , 2018. 4 -
- [18][18] O. Russakovsky, L.-J. Li, and L. Fei-Fei. Best of both worlds: human-machine collaboration for object annotation. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 2121-2131, 2015. 4 -
- [20][20] A. Shrivastava, R. Sukthankar, J. Malik, and A. Gupta. Beyond skip connections: Top-down modulation for object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:1612.06851 , 2016. 3 - · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–166 of 166
Using deep transfer learning to detect scoliosis and spondylolisthesis from x-ray images
Fraiwan, M., Audat, Z., Fraiwan, L., & Manasreh, T. (2022) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0267851 · Cited by 90
Domain-Specific Suppression for Adaptive Object Detection
Wang, Y., Zhang, R., Zhang, S., Li, M., Xia, Y., Zhang, X., & Liu, S. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr46437.2021.00948 · Cited by 93
An explainable and efficient deep learning framework for video anomaly detection
Wu, C., Shao, S., Tunc, C., Satam, P., & Hariri, S. (2022) · Cluster Computing · doi:10.1007/s10586-021-03439-5 · Cited by 88
Adaptive Fusion of Multi-Scale YOLO for Pedestrian Detection
Hsu, W.-Y., & Lin, W.-Y. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3102600 · Cited by 80
Agents and robots for collaborating and supporting physicians in healthcare scenarios
Lanza, F., Seidita, V., & Chella, A. (2020) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2020.103483 · Cited by 70
Kim, S., & Kim, H. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3054879 · Cited by 71
“5 presents the mAP results of the original YOLOv4 network [10] and the quantized YOLOv4 network with the various options.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialParking Time Violation Tracking Using YOLOv8 and Tracking Algorithms
Sharma, N., Baral, S., Paing, M. P., & Chawuthai, R. (2023) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s23135843 · Cited by 78
Saffaryazdi, N., Wasim, S. T., Dileep, K., Nia, A. F., Nanayakkara, S., Broadbent, E., & Billinghurst, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.864047 · Cited by 69
Data-free Knowledge Distillation for Object Detection
Chawla, A., Yin, H., Molchanov, P., & Alvarez, J. (2021) · 2021 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) · doi:10.1109/wacv48630.2021.00333 · Cited by 70
iCaps-Dfake: An Integrated Capsule-Based Model for Deepfake Image and Video Detection
Khalil, S. S., Youssef, S. M., & Saleh, S. N. (2021) · Future Internet · doi:10.3390/fi13040093 · Cited by 67
A Spacecraft Dataset for Detection, Segmentation and Parts Recognition
Dung, H. A., Chen, B., & Chin, T.-J. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw53098.2021.00229 · Cited by 69
A survey of model compression strategies for object detection
Lyu, Z., Yu, T., Pan, F., Zhang, Y., Luo, J., Zhang, D., Chen, Y., Zhang, B., & Li, G. (2023) · Multimedia Tools and Applications · doi:10.1007/s11042-023-17192-x · Cited by 65
Learning to Rank Proposals for Object Detection
Tan, Z., Nie, X., Qian, Q., Li, N., & Li, H. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00836 · Cited by 56
Deep Active Learning for Surface Defect Detection
Lv, X., Duan, F., Jiang, J.-J., Fu, X., & Gan, L. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20061650 · Cited by 58
Visual-based obstacle detection and tracking, and conflict detection for small UAS sense and avoid
Opromolla, R., & Fasano, G. (2021) · Aerospace Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.ast.2021.107167 · Cited by 54
Zhu, J., Li, X., Jin, P., Xu, Q., Sun, Z., & Song, X. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s21010027 · Cited by 51
“The original backbones in each subnet are inherited from YOLOv3.”
MethodInfluentialEfficient edge-ai application deployment for fpgas
Kalapothas, S., Flamis, G., & Kitsos, P. (2022) · Information · doi:10.3390/info13060279 · Cited by 53
Embodied Amodal Recognition: Learning to Move to Perceive Objects
Yang, J., Ren, Z., Xu, M., Chen, X., Crandall, D., Parikh, D., & Batra, D. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00213 · Cited by 48
Cosmas, K., & Kenichi, A. (2020) · Aerospace · doi:10.3390/aerospace7110159 · Cited by 51
A Systematic Review of Using Machine Learning and Natural Language Processing in Smart Policing
Sarzaeim, P., Mahmoud, Q. H., Azim, A., Bauer, G., & Bowles, I. (2023) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers12120255 · Cited by 51
Towards learning-based planning: The nuPlan benchmark for real-world autonomous driving
Karnchanachari, N., Geromichalos, D., Tan, K. S., Li, N., Eriksen, C., Yaghoubi, S., Mehdipour, N., Bernasconi, G., Fong, W. K., Guo, Y., et al. (2024) · 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) · doi:10.1109/icra57147.2024.10610077 · Cited by 46
Kumar, S., Singh, S. K., Varshney, S., Singh, S., Kumar, P., Kim, B.-G., & Ra, I.-H. (2023) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su152416869 · Cited by 46
Huo, Y., Li, Z., & Zhang, F. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3041415 · Cited by 44
Ship Detection and Tracking in Inland Waterways Using Improved YOLOv3 and Deep SORT
Jie, Y., Leonidas, L., Mumtaz, F., & Ali, M. (2021) · Symmetry · doi:10.3390/sym13020308 · Cited by 44
Image data assessment approach for deep learning-based metal surface defect-detection systems
Lin, H.-I., & Wibowo, F. S. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3068256 · Cited by 43
Dataset for human fall recognition in an uncontrolled environment
Guerrero, J. C. E., España, E. M., Añasco, M. M., & Lopera, J. E. P. (2022) · Data in Brief · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2022.108610 · Cited by 45
Crosstalk Removal in Forward Scan Sonar Image Using Deep Learning for Object Detection
Sung, M., Cho, H., Kim, T., Joe, H., & Yu, S.-C. (2019) · IEEE Sensors Journal · doi:10.1109/jsen.2019.2925830 · Cited by 43
Intelligent detection of fastener defects in ballastless tracks based on deep learning
Ye, W., Ren, J., Lu, C., Zhang, A. A., Zhan, Y., & Liu, J. (2024) · Automation in Construction · doi:10.1016/j.autcon.2024.105280 · Cited by 42
SELMA: SEmantic Large-Scale Multimodal Acquisitions in Variable Weather, Daytime and Viewpoints
Testolina, P., Barbato, F., Michieli, U., Giordani, M., Zanuttigh, P., & Zorzi, M. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · doi:10.1109/tits.2023.3257086 · Cited by 41
Qiao, S., Pang, S., Luo, G., Pan, S., Chen, T., & Lv, Z. (2022) · IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2021.3091579 · Cited by 41
Yolo-3DMM for Simultaneous Multiple Object Detection and Tracking in Traffic Scenarios
Liu, L., Song, X., Song, H., Sun, S., Han, X.-F., Akhtar, N., & Mian, A. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · doi:10.1109/tits.2024.3360875 · Cited by 38
Lema, D. G., Usamentiaga, R., & García, D. F. (2024) · Integration · doi:10.1016/j.vlsi.2023.102127 · Cited by 41
YOLOBench: Benchmarking Efficient Object Detectors on Embedded Systems
Lazarevich, I., Grimaldi, M., Kumar, R., Mitra, S., Khan, S., & Sah, S. (2023) · 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW) · doi:10.1109/iccvw60793.2023.00126 · Cited by 37
“Backbone Neck YOLOv3 [26] DarkNet53 FPN YOLOv4 [2] CSPDNet53 SPP-PAN YOLOv5 [11] CSPDNet53-C3 SPPF-PAN-C3 YOLOv6s-3 [17] EfficientRep RepBiFPAN YOLOv6m-3 [17] CSPBep (e=2/3) CSPRepBiFPAN YOLOv6l-3 [17] CSPBep (e=1/2) CSPRepBiFPAN YOLOv7 [31] E-ELAN SPPF-ELAN-PAN YOLOv8 [12] CSPDNet53-C2f…”
High Speed and High Dynamic Range Video with an Event Camera
Rebecq, H., Ranftl, R., Koltun, V., & Scaramuzza, D. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2019.2963386 · Cited by 50
Zou, B., Qin, J., & Zhang, L. (2022) · IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2021.3139605 · Cited by 31
Cho, J., Kim, Y. J., Sunwoo, L., Lee, G. P., Nguyen, T. Q., Cho, S. J., Baik, S. H., Bae, Y. J., Choi, B. S., Jung, C., et al. (2021) · Frontiers in Oncology · doi:10.3389/fonc.2021.739639 · Cited by 30
A single-shot multi-level feature reused neural network for object detection
Wei, L., Cui, W., Hu, Z., Sun, H., & Hou, S. (2021) · The Visual Computer · doi:10.1007/s00371-019-01787-3 · Cited by 29
Zhang, F., Yang, F., Li, C., & Yuan, G. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2919103 · Cited by 29
“object locations and classify their corresponding categories [21]–[24].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialNakhle, F., & Harfouche, A. L. (2021) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2021.100323 · Cited by 28
“These images were then used to train YOLOv3, which uses a DCNN architecture (see algorithm 7) named DarkNet-53, pretrained on the ImageNet dataset.”
MethodPronello, C., & Garzón Ruiz, X. R. (2023) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s23187719 · Cited by 24
ChiNet: Deep recurrent convolutional learning for multimodal spacecraft pose estimation
Rondao, D., Aouf, N., & Richardson, M. A. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · doi:10.1109/taes.2022.3193085 · Cited by 24
Noninvasive Passenger Detection Comparison Using Thermal Imager and IP Cameras
Kuchár, P., Pirník, R., Tichý, T., Rástočný, K., Skuba, M., & Tettamanti, T. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su132212928 · Cited by 23
Tactile Audio Responsive Intelligent System
Zeinullin, M., & Hersh, M. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3223099 · Cited by 22
Blind Users Accessing Their Training Images in Teachable Object Recognizers
Hong, J., Gandhi, J., Mensah, E. E., Zeraati, F. Z., Jarjue, E., Lee, K., & Kacorri, H. (2022) · Proceedings of the 24th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility · doi:10.1145/3517428.3544824 · Cited by 22
Sketch2Code: Transformation of Sketches to UI in Real-time Using Deep Neural Network
Jain, V., Agrawal, P., Banga, S., Kapoor, R., & Gulyani, S. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1910.08930 · Cited by 20
Realtime Vehicle Tracking Method Based on YOLOv5 + DeepSORT
Lin, L., He, H., Xu, Z., & Wu, D. (2023) · Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience · doi:10.1155/2023/7974201 · Cited by 18
Improved YOLOv8-Based Target Precision Detection Algorithm for Train Wheel Tread Defects
Wen, Y., Gao, X., Luo, L., & Li, J. (2024) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s24113477 · Cited by 18
Ten Years of Active Learning Techniques and Object Detection: A Systematic Review
Garcia, D., Carias, J., Adão, T., Jesus, R., Cunha, A., & Magalhães, L. G. (2023) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app131910667 · Cited by 17
QBox: Partial Transfer Learning With Active Querying for Object Detection
Tang, Y.-P., Wei, X.-S., Zhao, B., & Huang, S.-J. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems · doi:10.1109/tnnls.2021.3111621 · Cited by 17
Video-based automatic people counting for public transport: On-bus versus off-bus deployment
McCarthy, C., Ghaderi, H., Martí, F., Jayaraman, P., & Dia, H. (2025) · Computers in Industry · doi:10.1016/j.compind.2024.104195 · Cited by 14
Harnessing the Potential of Function-Reuse in Multimedia Cloud Systems
Denninnart, C., & Salehi, M. A. (2022) · IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems · doi:10.1109/tpds.2021.3097911 · Cited by 13
DeepFake Detection Algorithms: A Meta-Analysis
Zotov, S., Dremliuga, R., Borshevnikov, A., & Krivosheeva, K. (2020) · 2020 2nd Symposium on Signal Processing Systems · doi:10.1145/3421515.3421532 · Cited by 12
Deep active learning with Weighting filter for object detection
Huang, W., Sun, S., Lin, X., Zhang, D., & Ma, L. (2023) · Displays · doi:10.1016/j.displa.2022.102282 · Cited by 11
UMS: Live Migration of Containerized Services across Autonomous Computing Systems
Chanikaphon, T., & Salehi, M. A. (2023) · GLOBECOM 2023 - 2023 IEEE Global Communications Conference · doi:10.1109/globecom54140.2023.10437519 · Cited by 11
Isaac-Medina, B. K. S., Poyser, M., Organisciak, D., Willcocks, C. G., Breckon, T. P., & Shum, H. P. H. (2021) · 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW) · doi:10.1109/iccvw54120.2021.00142 · Cited by 9
CyberCortex.AI: an AI-based operating system for autonomous robotics and complex automation
Grigorescu, S., & Zaha, M. (2025) · Journal of Field Robotics · doi:10.1002/rob.22426 · Cited by 9
Multimodal Generative Models for Compositional Representation Learning
Wu, M., & Goodman, N. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.05075 · Cited by 8
SQuantizer: Simultaneous Learning for Both Sparse and Low-precision Neural Networks
Park, M. S., Xu, X., & Brick, C. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1812.08301 · Cited by 8
Domain Generalization for In-Orbit 6D Pose Estimation
Legrand, A., Detry, R., & De Vleeschouwer, C. (2025) · Journal of Aerospace Information Systems · doi:10.2514/1.i011498 · Cited by 10
Li, C., Zhang, R., Wong, J., Gokmen, C., Srivastava, S., Martín-Martín, R., Wang, C., Levine, G., Ai, W., Martinez, B., et al. (2024) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.09227 · Cited by 6
“Object detection failures primarily resulted from our object detector, YOLO v3 [70], failing to detect the object to interact with; a second, less common, object detection failure corresponds to the depth camera returning invalid measurements for the detected object.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialUltralytics YOLO26: Unified Real-Time End-to-End Vision Models
Jocher, G., Qiu, J., Liu, M., Lyu, S., Akyon, F. C., & Kalfaoglu, M. E. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.03748 · Cited by 16
“One-stage detectors (SSD [44], RetinaNet [39], YOLOv3 [59], Ultralytics YOLOv5 [28]) traded proposal generation for dense prediction, drastically reducing latency.”
Qiu, Y., Lu, H., Mei, J., Bao, S., & Xu, J. (2024) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2024.124734 · Cited by 5
Online continual streaming learning for embedded space applications
Mazouz, A. E., & Nguyen, V.-T. (2024) · Journal of Real-Time Image Processing · doi:10.1007/s11554-024-01438-4 · Cited by 3
Fast and Accurate Error Simulation for CNNs Against Soft Errors
Bolchini, C., Cassano, L., Miele, A., & Toschi, A. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Computers · doi:10.1109/tc.2022.3184274 · Cited by 1
An Energy-efficient and Accurate Object Detection Design for Mobile Applications
Chen, K.-H., Wang, J.-H., & Su, C.-W. (2022) · 2022 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics - Taiwan · doi:10.1109/icce-taiwan55306.2022.9869164 · Cited by 1
Chojecki, P., Strazdas, D., Przewozny, D., Gard, N., Runde, D., Hoerner, N., Al-Hamadi, A., Eisert, P., & Bosse, S. (2023) · doi:10.20944/preprints202304.0415.v2 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Redmon, J., & Farhadi, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- ORCID
- Farhadi, Ali
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2018
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1804.02767
- OpenAlex
- W2796347433
- Cited by
- 17,141
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 204 · 2025: 1024 · 2024: 2199 · 2023: 3036 · 2022: 2907 · 2021: 3494 · 2020: 2657 · 2019: 1446 · 2018: 170
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- 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 › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
- Keywords
- YOLOv3, object detection, real-time detection, Single Shot MultiBox Detector, detection accuracy, inference speed
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
