pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 1711.07264 · v2 · submitted 2017-11-20 · 💻 cs.CV

Recognition: unknown

Light-Head R-CNN: In Defense of Two-Stage Object Detector

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification 💻 cs.CV
keywords r-cnnlight-headtwo-stagedetectorsfastcococomputationdesign
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

In this paper, we first investigate why typical two-stage methods are not as fast as single-stage, fast detectors like YOLO and SSD. We find that Faster R-CNN and R-FCN perform an intensive computation after or before RoI warping. Faster R-CNN involves two fully connected layers for RoI recognition, while R-FCN produces a large score maps. Thus, the speed of these networks is slow due to the heavy-head design in the architecture. Even if we significantly reduce the base model, the computation cost cannot be largely decreased accordingly. We propose a new two-stage detector, Light-Head R-CNN, to address the shortcoming in current two-stage approaches. In our design, we make the head of network as light as possible, by using a thin feature map and a cheap R-CNN subnet (pooling and single fully-connected layer). Our ResNet-101 based light-head R-CNN outperforms state-of-art object detectors on COCO while keeping time efficiency. More importantly, simply replacing the backbone with a tiny network (e.g, Xception), our Light-Head R-CNN gets 30.7 mmAP at 102 FPS on COCO, significantly outperforming the single-stage, fast detectors like YOLO and SSD on both speed and accuracy. Code will be made publicly available.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Are Candidate Models Really Needed for Active Learning?

    cs.CV 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Active learning with randomly initialized models achieves comparable results to traditional candidate-model methods, with low-confidence sampling proving most effective.