mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

DeepScribe: Localization and Classification of Elamite Cuneiform Signs Via Deep Learning

arXiv 2306.01268 ↗First posted 2 Jun 2023cs.CV cs.DL cs.IRcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Twenty-five hundred years ago, the paperwork of the Achaemenid Empire was recorded on clay tablets. In 1933, archaeologists from the University of Chicago's Oriental Institute (OI) found tens of thousands of these tablets and fragments during the excavation of Persepolis. Many of these tablets have been painstakingly photographed and annotated by expert cuneiformists, and now provide a rich dataset consisting of over 5,000 annotated tablet images and 100,000 cuneiform sign bounding boxes. We leverage this dataset to develop DeepScribe, a modular computer vision pipeline capable of localizing cuneiform signs and providing suggestions for the identity of each sign. We investigate the difficulty of learning subtasks relevant to cuneiform tablet transcription on ground-truth data, finding that a RetinaNet object detector can achieve a localization mAP of 0.78 and a ResNet classifier can achieve a top-5 sign classification accuracy of 0.89. The end-to-end pipeline achieves a top-5 classification accuracy of 0.80. As part of the classification module, DeepScribe groups cuneiform signs into morphological clusters. We consider how this automatic clustering approach differs from the organization of standard, printed sign lists and what we may learn from it. These components, trained individually, are sufficient to produce a system that can analyze photos of cuneiform tablets from the Achaemenid period and provide useful transliteration suggestions to researchers. We evaluate the model's end-to-end performance on locating and classifying signs, providing a roadmap to a linguistically-aware transliteration system, then consider the model's potential utility when applied to other periods of cuneiform writing.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 77 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 2 Jun 2023.

Builds on

17 of 77 references.

References · 17

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2014Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimizationcited by 36,960
  3. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
  4. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  5. 2015Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region Proposal Networkscited by 9,617
  6. 2020End-to-End Object Detection with Transformerscited by 7,384
  7. 2015SSD: Single Shot MultiBox Detectorcited by 3,125
  8. 2017Revisiting Unreasonable Effectiveness of Data in Deep Learning Eracited by 916
  9. 2020A review of deep learning in medical imaging: Imaging traits, technology trends, case studies with progress highlights, and future promisescited by 230
  10. 2015Learning Visual Features from Large Weakly Supervised Datacited by 165
  11. 2016Joint Line Segmentation and Transcription for End-to-End Handwritten Paragraph Recognitioncited by 46
  12. 2019Restoring ancient text using deep learning: a case study on Greek epigraphycited by 25
5 more
  1. 2018Recognizing Cuneiform Signs Using Graph Based Methodscited by 14
  2. 2019A Computationally Efficient Pipeline Approach to Full Page Offline Handwritten Text Recognitioncited by 9
  3. 2020Deciphering Undersegmented Ancient Scripts Using Phonetic Priorcited by 9
  4. 2019Neural Decipherment via Minimum-Cost Flow: from Ugaritic to Linear Bcited by 7
  5. 2018Chinese Text in the Wildcited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

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

4 papers.