mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

What Are Expected Queries in End-to-End Object Detection?

arXiv 2206.01232 ↗First posted 2 Jun 2022cs.CVcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

End-to-end object detection is rapidly progressed after the emergence of DETR. DETRs use a set of sparse queries that replace the dense candidate boxes in most traditional detectors. In comparison, the sparse queries cannot guarantee a high recall as dense priors. However, making queries dense is not trivial in current frameworks. It not only suffers from heavy computational cost but also difficult optimization. As both sparse and dense queries are imperfect, then what are expected queries in end-to-end object detection? This paper shows that the expected queries should be Dense Distinct Queries (DDQ). Concretely, we introduce dense priors back to the framework to generate dense queries. A duplicate query removal pre-process is applied to these queries so that they are distinguishable from each other. The dense distinct queries are then iteratively processed to obtain final sparse outputs. We show that DDQ is stronger, more robust, and converges faster. It obtains 44.5 AP on the MS COCO detection dataset with only 12 epochs. DDQ is also robust as it outperforms previous methods on both object detection and instance segmentation tasks on various datasets. DDQ blends advantages from traditional dense priors and recent end-to-end detectors. We hope it can serve as a new baseline and inspires researchers to revisit the complementarity between traditional methods and end-to-end detectors. The source code is publicly available at urlhttps://github.com/jshilong/DDQ.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 27 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 2022.

Builds on

25 of 27 references.

References · 25

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  3. 2015Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networkscited by 9,617
  4. 2020End-to-End Object Detection with Transformerscited by 7,384
  5. 2020Deformable DETR: Deformable Transformers for End-to-End Object Detectioncited by 3,410
  6. 2015Fast R-CNNcited by 2,930
  7. 2016Aggregated Residual Transformations for Deep Neural Networkscited by 2,540
  8. 2019MMDetection: Open MMLab Detection Toolbox and Benchmarkcited by 1,379
  9. 2017Cascade R-CNN: Delving into High Quality Object Detectioncited by 1,275
  10. 2019LVIS: A Dataset for Large Vocabulary Instance Segmentationcited by 1,215
  11. 2022DAB-DETR: Dynamic Anchor Boxes are Better Queries for DETRcited by 569
  12. 2020Sparse R-CNN: End-to-End Object Detection with Learnable Proposalscited by 494
13 more
  1. 2021Conditional DETR for Fast Training Convergencecited by 422
  2. 2019SOLO: Segmenting Objects by Locationscited by 289
  3. 2018CrowdHuman: A Benchmark for Detecting Human in a Crowdcited by 283
  4. 2021TOOD: Task-aligned One-stage Object Detectioncited by 218
  5. 2021Dynamic Head: Unifying Object Detection Heads with Attentionscited by 185
  6. 2021Fast Convergence of DETR with Spatially Modulated Co-Attentioncited by 176
  7. 2021Instances as Queriescited by 157
  8. 2020Rethinking Transformer-based Set Prediction for Object Detectioncited by 156
  9. 2020Probabilistic Anchor Assignment with IoU Prediction for Object Detectioncited by 150
  10. 2021Efficient DETR: Improving End-to-End Object Detector with Dense Priorcited by 128
  11. 2020Generalized Focal Loss V2: Learning Reliable Localization Quality Estimation for Dense Object Detectioncited by 104
  12. 2020End-to-End Object Detection with Fully Convolutional Networkcited by 70
  13. 2019AugFPN: Improving Multi-scale Feature Learning for Object Detectioncited by 54

Built on by

Cited by year

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

4 papers.