mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Exposing Semantic Segmentation Failures via Maximum Discrepancy Competition

arXiv 2103.00259 ↗First posted 27 Feb 2021cs.CVcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Semantic segmentation is an extensively studied task in computer vision, with numerous methods proposed every year. Thanks to the advent of deep learning in semantic segmentation, the performance on existing benchmarks is close to saturation. A natural question then arises: Does the superior performance on the closed (and frequently re-used) test sets transfer to the open visual world with unconstrained variations? In this paper, we take steps toward answering the question by exposing failures of existing semantic segmentation methods in the open visual world under the constraint of very limited human labeling effort. Inspired by previous research on model falsification, we start from an arbitrarily large image set, and automatically sample a small image set by MAximizing the Discrepancy (MAD) between two segmentation methods. The selected images have the greatest potential in falsifying either (or both) of the two methods. We also explicitly enforce several conditions to diversify the exposed failures, corresponding to different underlying root causes. A segmentation method, whose failures are more difficult to be exposed in the MAD competition, is considered better. We conduct a thorough MAD diagnosis of ten PASCAL VOC semantic segmentation algorithms. With detailed analysis of experimental results, we point out strengths and weaknesses of the competing algorithms, as well as potential research directions for further advancement in semantic segmentation. The codes are publicly available at urlhttps://github.com/QTJiebin/MADSegmentation.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 52 of its 95 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Feb 2021.

Builds on

52 of 95 references.

References · 52

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2015U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentationcited by 19,604
  3. 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
  4. 2015Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networkscited by 9,617
  5. 2014ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challengecited by 8,441
  6. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
  7. 2014Fully Convolutional Networks for Semantic Segmentationcited by 4,845
  8. 2016The Cityscapes Dataset for Semantic Urban Scene Understandingcited by 4,427
  9. 2016DeepLab: Semantic Image Segmentation with Deep Convolutional Nets, Atrous Convolution, and Fully Connected CRFscited by 3,239
  10. 2018Encoder-Decoder with Atrous Separable Convolution for Semantic Image Segmentationcited by 3,210
  11. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,857
  12. 2016Aggregated Residual Transformations for Deep Neural Networkscited by 2,540
38 more
  1. 2016Pyramid Scene Parsing Networkcited by 2,472
  2. 2017Rethinking Atrous Convolution for Semantic Image Segmentationcited by 2,154
  3. 2018UNet++: A Nested U-Net Architecture for Medical Image Segmentationcited by 1,518
  4. 2019Do ImageNet Classifiers Generalize to ImageNet?cited by 1,507
  5. 2015SegNet: A Deep Convolutional Encoder-Decoder Architecture for Image Segmentationcited by 1,483
  6. 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,430
  7. 2019Natural Adversarial Examplescited by 1,401
  8. 2015Multi-Scale Context Aggregation by Dilated Convolutionscited by 1,128
  9. 2018Dual Attention Network for Scene Segmentationcited by 1,001
  10. 2017Deeper, Broader and Artier Domain Generalizationcited by 983
  11. 2018CCNet: Criss-Cross Attention for Semantic Segmentationcited by 717
  12. 2014Deep Domain Confusion: Maximizing for Domain Invariancecited by 597
  13. 2015Holistically-Nested Edge Detectioncited by 590
  14. 2016RefineNet: Multi-Path Refinement Networks for High-Resolution Semantic Segmentationcited by 463
  15. 2019Panoptic-DeepLabcited by 362
  16. 2017DeepXplore: Automated Whitebox Testing of Deep Learning Systemscited by 307
  17. 2017Dilated Residual Networkscited by 293
  18. 2017ICNet for Real-Time Semantic Segmentation on High-Resolution Imagescited by 261
  19. 2019Approximating CNNs with Bag-of-local-Features models works surprisingly well on ImageNetcited by 260
  20. 2017Large Kernel Matters -- Improve Semantic Segmentation by Global Convolutional Networkcited by 208
  21. 2017Understanding Convolution for Semantic Segmentationcited by 168
  22. 2020BREEDS: Benchmarks for Subpopulation Shiftcited by 155
  23. 2018Pyramid Attention Network for Semantic Segmentationcited by 148
  24. 2019Expectation-Maximization Attention Networks for Semantic Segmentationcited by 147
  25. 2017On the Robustness of Semantic Segmentation Models to Adversarial Attackscited by 126
  26. 2018ESPNetv2: A Light-weight, Power Efficient, and General Purpose Convolutional Neural Networkcited by 90
  27. 2018Interpreting CNNs via Decision Treescited by 89
  28. 2019FasterSeg: Searching for Faster Real-time Semantic Segmentationcited by 73
  29. 2020Cars Can't Fly up in the Sky: Improving Urban-Scene Segmentation via Height-driven Attention Networkscited by 70
  30. 2018Excessive Invariance Causes Adversarial Vulnerabilitycited by 66
  31. 2019Dual Graph Convolutional Network for Semantic Segmentationcited by 59
  32. 2019Collaborative Global-Local Networks for Memory-Efficient Segmentation of Ultra-High Resolution Imagescited by 51
  33. 2020Automated Synthetic-to-Real Generalizationcited by 35
  34. 2017BlitzNet: A Real-Time Deep Network for Scene Understandingcited by 29
  35. 2018Light-Weight RefineNet for Real-Time Semantic Segmentationcited by 27
  36. 2017Stacked Deconvolutional Network for Semantic Segmentationcited by 18
  37. 2019Practical Solutions for Machine Learning Safety in Autonomous Vehiclescited by 15
  38. 2020I Am Going MAD: Maximum Discrepancy Competition for Comparing Classifiers Adaptivelycited by 13

50 most cited of 52 All 52 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 2; 2023: 0; 2024: 1; 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

7 papers.