Which to Match? Selecting Consistent GT-Proposal Assignment for Pedestrian Detection
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Accurate pedestrian classification and localization have received considerable attention due to their wide applications such as security monitoring, autonomous driving, etc. Although pedestrian detectors have made great progress in recent years, the fixed Intersection over Union (IoU) based assignment-regression manner still limits their performance. Two main factors are responsible for this: 1) the IoU threshold faces a dilemma that a lower one will result in more false positives, while a higher one will filter out the matched positives; 2) the IoU-based GT-Proposal assignment suffers from the inconsistent supervision problem that spatially adjacent proposals with similar features are assigned to different ground-truth boxes, which means some very similar proposals may be forced to regress towards different targets, and thus confuses the bounding-box regression when predicting the location results. In this paper, we first put forward the question that Regression Direction would affect the performance for pedestrian detection. Consequently, we address the weakness of IoU by introducing one geometric sensitive search algorithm as a new assignment and regression metric. Different from the previous IoU-based one-to-one assignment manner of one proposal to one ground-truth box, the proposed method attempts to seek a reasonable matching between the sets of proposals and ground-truth boxes. Specifically, we boost the MR-FPPI under R75 by 8.8% on Citypersons dataset. Furthermore, by incorporating this method as a metric into the state-of-the-art pedestrian detectors, we show a consistent improvement.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 52 of its 83 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Mar 2021.
Builds on
52 of 83 references.
References · 52
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
- 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
- 2015Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networkscited by 9,617
- 2017mixup: Beyond Empirical Risk Minimizationcited by 5,155
- 2016Feature Pyramid Networks for Object Detectioncited by 5,021
- 2017Squeeze-and-Excitation Networkscited by 4,763
- 2015SSD: Single Shot MultiBox Detectorcited by 3,125
- 2015Fast R-CNNcited by 2,930
- 2016Aggregated Residual Transformations for Deep Neural Networkscited by 2,540
- 2017Non-local Neural Networkscited by 2,290
- 2019FCOS: Fully Convolutional One-Stage Object Detectioncited by 1,573
38 more
- 2016YOLO9000: Better, Faster, Strongercited by 1,429
- 2015Spatial Transformer Networkscited by 1,423
- 2015Show, Attend and Tell: Neural Image Caption Generation with Visual Attentioncited by 1,421
- 2019Generalized Intersection over Union: A Metric and A Loss for Bounding Box Regressioncited by 1,361
- 2017Cascade R-CNN: Delving into High Quality Object Detectioncited by 1,275
- 2019Objects as Pointscited by 1,172
- 2017Focal Loss for Dense Object Detectioncited by 749
- 2019Bridging the Gap Between Anchor-based and Anchor-free Detection via Adaptive Training Sample Selectioncited by 539
- 2019Distance-IoU Loss: Faster and Better Learning for Bounding Box Regressioncited by 454
- 2016R-FCN: Object Detection via Region-based Fully Convolutional Networkscited by 414
- 2019Enforcing geometric constraints of virtual normal for depth predictioncited by 233
- 2017CityPersons: A Diverse Dataset for Pedestrian Detectioncited by 171
- 2020Probabilistic Anchor Assignment with IoU Prediction for Object Detectioncited by 150
- 2017Single-Shot Refinement Neural Network for Object Detectioncited by 129
- 2019FreeAnchor: Learning to Match Anchors for Visual Object Detectioncited by 90
- 2019Region Proposal by Guided Anchoringcited by 87
- 2016A Unified Multi-scale Deep Convolutional Neural Network for Fast Object Detectioncited by 83
- 2016Finding Tiny Facescited by 72
- 2017Repulsion Loss: Detecting Pedestrians in a Crowdcited by 62
- 2020Detection in Crowded Scenes: One Proposal, Multiple Predictionscited by 59
- 2018Occlusion-aware R-CNN: Detecting Pedestrians in a Crowdcited by 58
- 2018Dual Attention Matching Network for Context-Aware Feature Sequence based Person Re-Identificationcited by 50
- 2016Is Faster R-CNN Doing Well for Pedestrian Detection?cited by 37
- 2019Mask-Guided Attention Network for Occluded Pedestrian Detectioncited by 36
- 2020NMS by Representative Region: Towards Crowded Pedestrian Detection by Proposal Pairingcited by 36
- 2015Scale-aware Fast R-CNN for Pedestrian Detectioncited by 32
- 2017Deep Matching Prior Network: Toward Tighter Multi-oriented Text Detectioncited by 31
- 2019PedHunter: Occlusion Robust Pedestrian Detector in Crowded Scenescited by 30
- 2016How Far are We from Solving Pedestrian Detection?cited by 29
- 2017Illuminating Pedestrians via Simultaneous Detection & Segmentationcited by 26
- 2018MetaAnchor: Learning to Detect Objects with Customized Anchorscited by 21
- 2015Learning Complexity-Aware Cascades for Deep Pedestrian Detectioncited by 18
- 2015Taking a Deeper Look at Pedestrianscited by 15
- 2019Relational Learning for Joint Head and Human Detectioncited by 14
- 2018Pedestrian Detection with Autoregressive Network Phasescited by 12
- 2016Fused DNN: A deep neural network fusion approach to fast and robust pedestrian detectioncited by 10
- 2018Hi-Fi: Hierarchical Feature Integration for Skeleton Detectioncited by 6
- 2017To Boost or Not to Boost? On the Limits of Boosted Trees for Object Detectioncited by 4
50 most cited of 52 All 52 (JSON)
Built on by
Not cited yet.