REVIEW 1 cited by
Adaloss: Adaptive Loss Function for Landmark Localization
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Landmark localization is a challenging problem in computer vision with a multitude of applications. Recent deep learning based methods have shown improved results by regressing likelihood maps instead of regressing the coordinates directly. However, setting the precision of these regression targets during the training is a cumbersome process since it creates a trade-off between trainability vs localization accuracy. Using precise targets introduces a significant sampling bias and hence makes the training more difficult, whereas using imprecise targets results in inaccurate landmark detectors. In this paper, we introduce "Adaloss", an objective function that adapts itself during the training by updating the target precision based on the training statistics. This approach does not require setting problem-specific parameters and shows improved stability in training and better localization accuracy during inference. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed method in three different applications of landmark localization: 1) the challenging task of precisely detecting catheter tips in medical X-ray images, 2) localizing surgical instruments in endoscopic images, and 3) localizing facial features on in-the-wild images where we show state-of-the-art results on the 300-W benchmark dataset.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
landmarker: a Toolkit for Anatomical Landmark Localization in 2D/3D Images
landmarker provides a modular PyTorch-based toolkit for anatomical landmark localization in 2D/3D medical images, and its included models outperform literature baselines on two benchmark datasets.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.