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
YOLOv7: Trainable Bag-of-Freebies Sets New State-of-the-Art for Real-Time Object Detectors
Wang, C.-Y., Bochkovskiy, A., & Liao, H.-Y. M. (2023) · 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.00721 · Cited by 13,198
“Another real-time object detectors are developed for GPU [20, 79, 94], they mostly use ResNet [25], DarkNet [60], or DLA [85], and then use the CSPNet [77] strategy to optimize the architecture.”
MethodYOLOv4: Optimal Speed and Accuracy of Object Detection
Bochkovskiy, A., Wang, C.-Y., & Liao, H.-Y. M. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2004.10934 · Cited by 10,307
FCOS: Fully Convolutional One-Stage Object Detection
Tian, Z., Shen, C., Chen, H., & He, T. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00972 · Cited by 7,013
Generalized Intersection Over Union: A Metric and a Loss for Bounding Box Regression
Rezatofighi, H., Tsoi, N., Gwak, J., Sadeghian, A., Reid, I., & Savarese, S. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2019.00075 · Cited by 6,612
Distance-IoU Loss: Faster and Better Learning for Bounding Box Regression
Zheng, Z., Wang, P., Liu, W., Li, J., Ye, R., & Ren, D. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1911.08287 · Cited by 5,313
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
