PreprintCited by 362Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningMedical Image Segmentation Techniques

Causal Intervention for Weakly-Supervised Semantic Segmentation

Open access
Zhang, Dong, Zhang, Hanwang, Tang, Jinhui, Hua, Xiansheng, Sun, Qianru·2020·arXiv

Abstract

We present a causal inference framework to improve Weakly-Supervised Semantic Segmentation (WSSS). Specifically, we aim to generate better pixel-level pseudo-masks by using only image-level labels -- the most crucial step in WSSS. We attribute the cause of the ambiguous boundaries of pseudo-masks to the confounding context, e.g., the correct image-level classification of "horse" and "person" may be not only due to the recognition of each instance, but also their co-occurrence context, making the model inspection (e.g., CAM) hard to distinguish between the boundaries. Inspired by this, we propose a structural causal model to analyze the causalities among images, contexts, and class labels. Based on it, we develop a new method: Context Adjustment (CONTA), to remove the confounding bias in image-level classification and thus provide better pseudo-masks as ground-truth for the subsequent segmentation model. On PASCAL VOC 2012 and MS-COCO, we show that CONTA boosts various popular WSSS methods to new state-of-the-arts.

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.2009.12547

Cites

73 of 73 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?

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

2 of the 75 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [16][16] Ross Girshick. Fast r-cnn. In ICCV , 2015. 4 -
  2. [34][34] Min Lin, Qiang Chen, and Shuicheng Yan. Network in network. In ICLR , 2014. 5 -
  3. [74][74] Bolei Zhou, Aditya Khosla, Agata Lapedriza, Aude Oliva, and Antonio Torralba. Learning deep features for discriminative localization. In CVPR , 2016. 1, 4, 5, 16, 17

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, D., Zhang, H., Tang, J., Hua, X., & Sun, Q.
Affiliations
  • Nanjing University of Science and Technology (CN)
  • Nanyang Technological University (SG)
  • Singapore Management University (SG)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3088940539
Cited by
353
References
75
Citations by year
2025: 49 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Rare & Special e-Zone (The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology) (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 › Medical Image Segmentation Techniques
Keywords
weakly supervised semantic segmentation, pseudo-mask generation, image-level labels, structural causal models, confounding

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