Impact of Label Types on Training SWIN Models with Overhead Imagery
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding the impact of data set design on model training and performance can help alleviate the costs associated with generating remote sensing and overhead labeled data. This work examined the impact of training shifted window transformers using bounding boxes and segmentation labels, where the latter are more expensive to produce. We examined classification tasks by comparing models trained with both target and backgrounds against models trained with only target pixels, extracted by segmentation labels. For object detection models, we compared performance using either label type when training. We found that the models trained on only target pixels do not show performance improvement for classification tasks, appearing to conflate background pixels in the evaluation set with target pixels. For object detection, we found that models trained with either label type showed equivalent performance across testing. We found that bounding boxes appeared to be sufficient for tasks that did not require more complex labels, such as object segmentation. Continuing work to determine consistency of this result across data types and model architectures could potentially result in substantial savings in generating remote sensing data sets for deep learning.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 27 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Oct 2023.
Builds on
27 of 37 references.
References · 27
- 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,160
- 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
- 2021Swin Transformer: Hierarchical Vision Transformer using Shifted Windowscited by 12,082
- 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
- 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,928
- 2017Improved Regularization of Convolutional Neural Networks with Cutoutcited by 1,623
- 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,430
- 2019Natural Adversarial Examplescited by 1,401
- 2014Deep Neural Networks are Easily Fooled: High Confidence Predictions for Unrecognizable Imagescited by 774
- 2017DOTA: A Large-scale Dataset for Object Detection in Aerial Imagescited by 622
- 2019Unmasking Clever Hans Predictors and Assessing What Machines Really Learncited by 359
- 2020Noise or Signal: The Role of Image Backgrounds in Object Recognitioncited by 342
15 more
- 2019Object Detection in Optical Remote Sensing Images: A Survey and A New Benchmarkcited by 339
- 2021Object Detection in Aerial Images: A Large-Scale Benchmark and Challengescited by 202
- 2019iSAID: A Large-scale Dataset for Instance Segmentation in Aerial Imagescited by 195
- 2018xView: Objects in Context in Overhead Imagerycited by 145
- 2021FAIR1M: A Benchmark Dataset for Fine-grained Object Recognition in High-Resolution Remote Sensing Imagerycited by 143
- 2022A Whac-A-Mole Dilemma: Shortcuts Come in Multiples Where Mitigating One Amplifies Otherscited by 85
- 2020Remote Sensing Image Scene Classification Meets Deep Learning: Challenges, Methods, Benchmarks, and Opportunitiescited by 71
- 2022A Comprehensive Study of Image Classification Model Sensitivity to Foregrounds, Backgrounds, and Visual Attributescited by 56
- 2021Towards Robust Classification Model by Counterfactual and Invariant Data Generationcited by 30
- 2019Achieving Robustness in the Wild via Adversarial Mixing with Disentangled Representationscited by 28
- 2022Fighting Fire with Fire: Avoiding DNN Shortcuts through Primingcited by 15
- 2018BshapeNet: Object Detection and Instance Segmentation with Bounding Shape Maskscited by 7
- 2022AutoGeoLabel: Automated Label Generation for Geospatial Machine Learningcited by 6
- 2022Centerpoints Are All You Need in Overhead Imagerycited by 2
- 2022On Background Bias in Deep Metric Learningcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.