Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 59 references

Structure Tensor Representation for Robust Oriented Object Detection

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that encoding an oriented bounding box as a structure tensor—a 2×2 symmetric matrix with three parameters—and regressing those parameters with an L1 loss outperforms prior angle-coder and Gaussian-based methods across…

desk verdict A simple, modular angle representation that mostly works, but the paper's own tables don't support the SOTA claim and the square-object handling has an undocumented encoding/decoding mismatch. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10497 v1 pith:V2NOMAJW submitted 2024-11-15 cs.CV

Xavier Bou , Gabriele Facciolo , Rafael Grompone von Gioi , Jean-Michel Morel , Thibaud Ehret This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords orientedobjectdetectionstructuretensoranglerepresentationangularboundaryproblemsymmetryambiguityboundingboxregressionweaklysupervisedremotesensing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Oriented object detection adds a rotation angle to the usual bounding box, but predicting that angle directly is brittle: near the angular boundary tiny errors cause large losses, and symmetric objects make different angles produce the same box. This paper proposes to stop predicting the angle at all, and instead predict the three parameters (a, b, c) of a 2×2 structure tensor that encodes the box's width, height, and orientation through its eigenvalues and eigenvectors. Training with a plain L1 loss on those parameters makes equivalent rotations map to nearby tensors, so the boundary and symmetry problems largely disappear without extra hyperparameters. Across five datasets—aerial imagery, scene text, and a new COVID-19 test-strip benchmark—the representation reaches state-of-the-art or better mean average precision, with angular errors among the lowest reported and computational overhead near the bottom of the comparison.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the structure tensor T = Rθ Λ Rθ^T with Λ = diag(w/2, h/2), originally used in edge and corner detection; its three independent parameters (a, b, c) are the network's regression targets. The eigenvectors of T carry the box orientation, the eigenvalues carry width and height, and the continuity of T as a function of θ removes angular boundary cliffs; the eigenvalue ratio handles the symmetry of rectangles (π-periodic) and squares (π/2-periodic). Encoding and decoding are simple algebraic operations—no distributional distance, no hyperparameters—so the representation drops into an existing detector's angle head by replacing the scalar angle target with a three-vector target and applying an L1 loss.

What would settle it

Run a reconstruction test: encode a square box with the anisotropic rule, apply the paper's decoder, and compare the output (w,h,θ) with the input. If the decoded width is 2w, then the representation as specified cannot faithfully reconstruct square boxes, and the reported mAP improvements on datasets containing squares would need to be re-examined for whether the detector is ignoring the width error.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the proposed representation, a ground-truth oriented box (x, y, w, h, θ) is encoded as T = Rθ diag(w/2, h/2) Rθ^T, a symmetric matrix with components a, c, c, b. The angle head of a one-stage detector regresses these three numbers with an L1 loss; at inference the angle is read back from the eigenvector belonging to the larger eigenvalue, and width and height from twice the eigenvalues. Because the tensor entries vary continuously with rotation, the loss landscape no longer contains the sharp cliffs at ±π/2 or around the angular boundary that plague direct angle regression, and the eigenvalue ratio encodes the object's symmetry class so that rectangular and square objects are penalized consistently. Comparisons on DOTA v1.0, HRSC2016, ICDAR2015, MSRA-TD500, and the new C19TD dataset show that this representation matches or beats prior angle-coder and Gaussian-based baselines on mAP, and dedicated angular-error metrics (MAEθ and RMSEθ) place it among the most precise predictors. For square-like objects the encoder deliberately breaks isotropy by setting eigenvalues to w and h/2 (a 2:1 anisotropy) and normalizing the angle to a π/2 range, which the authors show improves both angular accuracy and mAP.

Load-bearing premise

For square-like objects (|w−h| ≤ ε) the encoder breaks isotropy by using eigenvalues λ1=w and λ2=h/2, but the paper's decoder formula w=2λ1 would then return twice the true width, and no separate decoding rule or value for ε is given, so the method assumes this mismatch does not hurt the reported results.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Replacing scalar angle regression with three-parameter tensor regression removes the need for hand-crafted angle losses or extra hyperparameters in rotated detectors.
  • Fully supervised (OBB) detectors gain mAP on aerial and scene-text benchmarks; weakly supervised (HBB-only) detectors also improve, suggesting the tensor gives the network a learnable orientation signal even without angular labels.
  • Angular precision, measured by MAE and RMSE of the predicted angle on true positives, is competitive with or better than the best angle coder tested, at similar computational cost.
  • The 2:1 anisotropic encoding for near-square objects improves angle error and mAP over isotropic encoding, and a stronger 4:1 anisotropy further lowers angle error but reduces mAP, so the anisotropy level is a tunable property of the representation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the tensor loss treats a box and its π-rotated equivalent as identical, the representation could transfer to other continuous periodic targets, such as oriented keypoints or vanishing points, wherever direct regression suffers boundary cliffs.
  • The decoder described for the general case recovers width as 2λ1, while the anisotropic square encoding sets λ1 = w; reconciling these two rules would require either a decoding threshold or a small width correction, a detail the paper does not specify.
  • A natural extension is to let the anisotropy ratio depend on the object's aspect ratio rather than a fixed 2:1 threshold; the paper's ablation suggests a continuum worth exploring.
  • The angular-error metric used in the paper's evaluation (minimum over π-shifted differences) treats rectangles as undirected segments; adopting a strictly oriented metric would test whether the tensor's symmetry handling aids oriented accuracy beyond the un-oriented metric.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes to represent the orientation of an oriented bounding box (OBB) by a 2x2 structure tensor T = R_theta * diag(lambda1, lambda2) * R_theta^T, where the network regresses the three parameters (a, b, c) under an L1 loss. The encoding/decoding pair is given by Eqs. (3)-(5), mapping (w, h, theta) to T and back. To handle square-like objects, Section 4 modifies the encoder for |w-h| <= epsilon to set lambda1 = w and lambda2 = h/2, and normalizes the angle to a pi/2 range. The method is evaluated on DOTA, HRSC2016, ICDAR2015, MSRA-TD500, and a new C19TD dataset, with comparisons to CSL, GWD, KLD, KFIoU, PSC, and others, plus ablations on the anisotropy ratio and computational cost.

Significance. The structure tensor representation is a simple, modular idea that plausibly combines the benefits of angle-coder methods (low computational overhead, direct regression) with the robustness of Gaussian-based representations to angular periodicity and symmetry. If the encoding/decoding inconsistency for square-like objects is resolved, the approach could be a useful alternative in oriented object detection. The paper provides extensive empirical evaluation across five datasets, including a purpose-built dataset of symmetric COVID-19 test objects, and a direct comparison of angular precision (Table 3) that is a useful contribution. The computational cost analysis in Table 5 is also a strength. However, the central claim of consistently achieving state-of-the-art results is not supported by the paper's own Table 1, and the handling of isotropic objects is not self-consistent.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Eq. (5)] The handling of square-like objects is internally inconsistent. For |w-h| <= epsilon, the encoder is changed so that lambda1 = w and lambda2 = h/2, but the decoder in Eq. (5) still computes w = 2*lambda1 and h = 2*lambda2. For a square of side s, an exact prediction of the encoded tensor decodes to w = 2s, h = s, which is not the original box. No alternative decoding rule is described, and the threshold epsilon is never specified. Since DOTA's storage-tank and roundabout classes and the C19TD dataset are explicitly chosen for their square-like objects, the reported results depend on this step. Please clarify the actual decoding rule for these objects, specify epsilon, or revise the encoding so that Eqs. (3)-(5) are mutually inverse for all OBBs.
  2. [Section 5.2, Table 1] The text claims that the approach 'achieves SOTA results for the DOTA dataset on OBB-supervised methods,' but Table 1 does not support this. On DOTA mAP50, KLD (71.6) and CSL (71.4) both outperform ST (71.3), and on mAP50:95, CSL (40.5) outperforms ST (39.5). The discussion should be revised to reflect the actual rankings rather than overclaiming state-of-the-art status.
  3. [Section 4 and Section 6] The paper repeatedly states that the method requires 'no additional hyperparameters' or 'does not require hyperparameter tuning.' However, the anisotropic encoding for square-like objects introduces two free choices: the 2:1 anisotropy ratio and the threshold epsilon. The ablation in Table 4 selects the 2:1 ratio based on validation performance, which is a hyperparameter selection. This claim should be qualified or removed.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and Section 1] The abstract states 'We make our code publicly available,' but no code link is provided anywhere in the manuscript. Please include the repository URL.
  2. [Section 1] The phrase 'To the best of out knowledge' contains a typo; it should be 'our knowledge.'
  3. [Section 4] The text says 'we handle the cases where w = h,' but the actual condition is |w - h| <= epsilon, not strict equality. Please rephrase for consistency.
  4. [Eq. (9)] The formula for the angular error delta has a redundant nested min: min(min(|theta_pred - theta_gt|, |theta_pred - theta_gt + pi|), |theta_pred - theta_gt - pi|). Simplify to a single min over the three absolute values.
  5. [Table 3] The header 'Angle MSE ( M AEθ)' appears to be a typo; it should be 'Angle MAE (MAEθ).'
  6. [Section 5.1] The C19TD dataset description mentions 'we highlight the significance of this data' but it is a new dataset; the introduction should make clear that this is a new contribution and describe how the dataset will be released.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is an empirical encoder/decoder comparison, and its reported predictions are measured outcomes rather than quantities forced by the representation's definition.

full rationale

The paper does not derive a result from itself. It defines an encoding E(w,h,theta) = T = R Lambda R^T and a decoding D via eigendecomposition with w=2*lambda_1, h=2*lambda_2, theta=arctan(v12/v11). Within the paper's own equations, E followed by D is the identity for the default anisotropic case; this is a definitional inverse transform, not a circular derivation of a substantive claim. The central contribution is empirical: a network is trained to regress T and its oriented-box outputs are evaluated on standard benchmarks. The reported mAP and angular-error numbers are measured on test data, not fitted constants. The anisotropy ratio (2:1) is selected through an ablation on the validation/benchmark split, but the paper transparently presents this as model selection ('we keep the 2:1 anisotropic structure tensor in all other experiments') rather than as a predicted quantity derived from first principles. No load-bearing self-citations appear; the cited classical structure-tensor works and Gaussian-based OBB methods are external and used for context or comparison, not to justify a conclusion that reduces to a self-citation. The noted inconsistency for square-like objects (Section 4 changes the encoder to lambda_1=w, lambda_2=h/2 while Eq. 5 still decodes w=2*lambda_1) is a potential correctness or implementation issue, not a circularity: it does not make the reported predictions equivalent to the method's inputs by construction. Under the hard rules, such a concern is outside the circularity scoring and does not raise the score.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on two free parameters: the 2:1 anisotropy ratio chosen by ablation and an underspecified square-detection threshold. The method assumes the standard OBB convention and that L1 loss on matrix entries works empirically. No new theoretical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Anisotropy ratio for square-like objects (2:1) = λ1 = w, λ2 = h/2
    Chosen in ablation (Table 4) as best mAP50 on DOTA and HRSC2016; 4:1 lowers mAP, isotropic hurts angle error.
  • Square detection threshold ε = not specified
    Defines |w-h| ≤ ε as square-like; no value given in the paper, making the method underspecified.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Oriented bounding boxes use the convention w ≥ h and θ within a limited range.
    Assumed throughout, needed for unique eigen-decomposition.
  • domain assumption L1 loss on structure tensor components is a suitable surrogate for angular accuracy.
    The central design choice; no theoretical justification is provided beyond empirical results.
  • ad hoc to paper Adding 2:1 anisotropy to square object encodings does not change the decoded box.
    The paper does not show the decoder is unchanged; Eq. 5 combined with λ1=w yields a doubled width.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Structure Tensor Representation for Robust Oriented Object Detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/V2NOMAJW

@misc{pith2026241110497,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Structure Tensor Representation for Robust Oriented Object Detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/V2NOMAJW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10497}
}
read the original abstract

Oriented object detection predicts orientation in addition to object location and bounding box. Precisely predicting orientation remains challenging due to angular periodicity, which introduces boundary discontinuity issues and symmetry ambiguities. Inspired by classical works on edge and corner detection, this paper proposes to represent orientation in oriented bounding boxes as a structure tensor. This representation combines the strengths of Gaussian-based methods and angle-coder solutions, providing a simple yet efficient approach that is robust to angular periodicity issues without additional hyperparameters. Extensive evaluations across five datasets demonstrate that the proposed structure tensor representation outperforms previous methods in both fully-supervised and weakly supervised tasks, achieving high precision in angular prediction with minimal computational overhead. Thus, this work establishes structure tensors as a robust and modular alternative for encoding orientation in oriented object detection. We make our code publicly available, allowing for seamless integration into existing object detectors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10497 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The proposed angle representation. Comparison be￾tween the traditional oriented bounding box format (x, y, w, h, θ) (in blue) and our structure tensor representation T (in orange). Orientation and anisotropy are represented in T by its eigenval￾ues λ1 and λ2, and their corresponding eigenvectors v1, v2. crease. This phenomenon, known as the boundary prob￾lem [36, 38, 40], can penalize the network while compar￾ing ma… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Structure tensor representation in a neural network. (a) During training, the backbone extracts image features f, which are used for classification and regression. The angle head predicts orientation as a structure tensor Tpred, and the ground truth OBBgt is encoded into Tgt for angle loss computation. (b) At inference, Tpred is decoded into the standard OBB format (x, y, w, h, θ). Blue denotes standard detector com… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Loss behavior with isotropic structure tensors. Rect￾angular objects exhibit π periodicity, with loss increasing as an￾gle error grows, while isotropic (square-like) objects yield consis￾tently low loss regardless of angle error. Introducing anisotropy results in a loss with π 2 periodicity that yields higher values as pre￾diction error increases. In this context, we integrate the proposed representation into networ… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative results of the proposed approach on several datasets. On the top, from left to right, detection examples from HRSC2016, DOTA, and ICDAR2015 are shown. On the bottom, the left image corresponds to the MSRA-TD500 dataset, while the one on the right belongs to…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bigun, G.H

    J. Bigun, G.H. Granlund, and J. Wiklund. Multidimensional orientation estimation with applications to texture analysis and optical flow. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 13(8):775–790, 1991. 2, 3

    work page 1991

  2. [2]

    Level set segmentation with multiple regions

    Thomas Brox and Joachim Weickert. Level set segmentation with multiple regions. IEEE Transactions on Image Process- ing, 15(10):3213–3218, 2006. 2, 3

    work page 2006

  3. [3]

    End-to- end object detection with transformers

    Nicolas Carion, Francisco Massa, Gabriel Synnaeve, Nicolas Usunier, Alexander Kirillov, and Sergey Zagoruyko. End-to- end object detection with transformers. In European confer- ence on computer vision, pages 213–229. Springer, 2020. 2

    2020

  4. [4]

    Group detr: Fast detr training with group-wise one-to-many assignment

    Qiang Chen, Xiaokang Chen, Jian Wang, Shan Zhang, Kun Yao, Haocheng Feng, Junyu Han, Errui Ding, Gang Zeng, and Jingdong Wang. Group detr: Fast detr training with group-wise one-to-many assignment. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 6633–6642, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Learning roi transformer for oriented object detection in aerial images

    Jian Ding, Nan Xue, Yang Long, Gui-Song Xia, and Qikai Lu. Learning roi transformer for oriented object detection in aerial images. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 2849– 2858, 2019. 2

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Centernet: Keypoint triplets for object detection

    Kaiwen Duan, Song Bai, Lingxi Xie, Honggang Qi, Qing- ming Huang, and Qi Tian. Centernet: Keypoint triplets for object detection. In 2019 IEEE/CVF International Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ICCV) , pages 6568–6577, 2019. 2

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    A fast operator for detection and precise location of distinct points, corners and centres of circular features

    Wolfgang F ¨orstner and Eberhard G ¨ulch. A fast operator for detection and precise location of distinct points, corners and centres of circular features. In Proc. ISPRS intercommis- sion conference on fast processing of photogrammetric data, pages 281–305. Interlaken, 1987. 2, 3

    work page 1987

  8. [8]

    Adamixer: A fast-converging query-based object detector

    Ziteng Gao, Limin Wang, Bing Han, and Sheng Guo. Adamixer: A fast-converging query-based object detector. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5364–5373, 2022. 2

    work page 2022

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation

    Ross Girshick, Jeff Donahue, Trevor Darrell, and Jitendra Malik. Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 580–587, 2014. 2

    2014

  2. [10]

    Redet: A rotation-equivariant detector for aerial object detection

    Jiaming Han, Jian Ding, Nan Xue, and Gui-Song Xia. Redet: A rotation-equivariant detector for aerial object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 2786–2795, 2021. 2

    2021

  3. [11]

    A combined corner and edge detector

    Chris Harris, Mike Stephens, et al. A combined corner and edge detector. In Alvey vision conference , pages 10–5244. Citeseer, 1988. 2, 3

    1988

  4. [12]

    Mask r-cnn

    Kaiming He, Georgia Gkioxari, Piotr Doll ´ar, and Ross Gir- shick. Mask r-cnn. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pages 2961–2969, 2017. 2

    2017

  5. [13]

    Mobilenets: Efficient convolu- tional neural networks for mobile vision applications

    Andrew G Howard, Menglong Zhu, Bo Chen, Dmitry Kalenichenko, Weijun Wang, Tobias Weyand, Marco An- dreetto, and Hartwig Adam. Mobilenets: Efficient convolu- tional neural networks for mobile vision applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:1704.04861, 2017. 2

    2017 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Detrs with hybrid matching

    Ding Jia, Yuhui Yuan, Haodi He, Xiaopei Wu, Haojun Yu, Weihong Lin, Lei Sun, Chao Zhang, and Han Hu. Detrs with hybrid matching. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 19702–19712, 2023. 2

    2023

  7. [15]

    Icdar 2015 competition on robust reading

    Dimosthenis Karatzas, Lluis Gomez-Bigorda, Anguelos Nicolaou, Suman Ghosh, Andrew Bagdanov, Masakazu Iwa- mura, Jiri Matas, Lukas Neumann, Vijay Ramaseshan Chan- drasekhar, Shijian Lu, Faisal Shafait, Seiichi Uchida, and Ernest Valveny. Icdar 2015 competition on robust reading...

    2015

  8. [16]

    Cornernet: Detecting objects as paired keypoints

    Hei Law and Jia Deng. Cornernet: Detecting objects as paired keypoints. In Proceedings of the European confer- ence on computer vision, pages 734–750, 2018. 2

    2018

  9. [17]

    Dn-detr: Accelerate detr training by intro- ducing query denoising

    Feng Li, Hao Zhang, Shilong Liu, Jian Guo, Lionel M Ni, and Lei Zhang. Dn-detr: Accelerate detr training by intro- ducing query denoising. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 13619–13627, 2022. 2

    2022

  10. [18]

    Fcosr: A simple anchor-free rotated detector for aerial object detection

    Zhonghua Li, Biao Hou, Zitong Wu, Bo Ren, and Chen Yang. Fcosr: A simple anchor-free rotated detector for aerial object detection. Remote Sensing, 15(23):5499, 2023. 2

    2023

  11. [19]

    Rotation-sensitive regression for oriented scene text detection

    Minghui Liao, Zhen Zhu, Baoguang Shi, Gui-song Xia, and Xiang Bai. Rotation-sensitive regression for oriented scene text detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5909–5918,

  12. [20]

    Focal loss for dense object detection

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Priya Goyal, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, and Piotr Doll´ar. Focal loss for dense object detection. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision, pages 2980–2988, 2017. 2, 6, 7, 8

    2017

  13. [21]

    Edge detection and ridge detection with automatic scale selection

    Tony Lindeberg. Edge detection and ridge detection with automatic scale selection. International journal of computer vision, 30:117–156, 1998. 2, 3

    1998

  14. [22]

    Fots: Fast oriented text spotting with a uni- fied network

    Xuebo Liu, Ding Liang, Shi Yan, Dagui Chen, Yu Qiao, and Junjie Yan. Fots: Fast oriented text spotting with a uni- fied network. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5676–5685,

  15. [23]

    A high resolution optical satellite image dataset for ship recognition and some new baselines

    Zikun Liu, Liu Yuan, Lubin Weng, and Yiping Yang. A high resolution optical satellite image dataset for ship recognition and some new baselines. In International conference on pat- tern recognition applications and methods , pages 324–331. SciTePress, 2017. 5

    2017

  16. [24]

    Pointobb: Learning oriented object de- tection via single point supervision

    Junwei Luo, Xue Yang, Yi Yu, Qingyun Li, Junchi Yan, and Yansheng Li. Pointobb: Learning oriented object de- tection via single point supervision. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 16730–16740, 2024. 2

    2024

  17. [25]

    Arbitrary-oriented scene text detection via rotation proposals

    Jianqi Ma, Weiyuan Shao, Hao Ye, Li Wang, Hong Wang, Yingbin Zheng, and Xiangyang Xue. Arbitrary-oriented scene text detection via rotation proposals. IEEE transac- tions on multimedia, 20(11):3111–3122, 2018. 1, 2

    2018

  18. [26]

    Conditional detr for fast training convergence

    Depu Meng, Xiaokang Chen, Zejia Fan, Gang Zeng, Houqiang Li, Yuhui Yuan, Lei Sun, and Jingdong Wang. Conditional detr for fast training convergence. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 3651–3660, 2021. 2

    2021

  19. [27]

    Learning modulated loss for rotated object detection

    Wen Qian, Xue Yang, Silong Peng, Junchi Yan, and Yue Guo. Learning modulated loss for rotated object detection. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelli- gence, pages 2458–2466, 2021. 3

    2021

  20. [28]

    You only look once: Unified, real-time object de- tection

    Joseph Redmon, Santosh Divvala, Ross Girshick, and Ali Farhadi. You only look once: Unified, real-time object de- tection. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 779–788, 2016. 2

    2016

  21. [29]

    Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks

    Shaoqing Ren, Kaiming He, Ross Girshick, and Jian Sun. Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. Advances in neural information process- ing systems, 28, 2015. 2

    2015

  22. [30]

    Optimal filters for extended optical flow

    Hanno Scharr. Optimal filters for extended optical flow. In International Workshop on Complex Motion , pages 14–29. Springer, 2004. 2, 3

    2004

  23. [31]

    Fair1m: A benchmark dataset for fine- grained object recognition in high-resolution remote sens- ing imagery

    Xian Sun, Peijin Wang, Zhiyuan Yan, Feng Xu, Ruiping Wang, Wenhui Diao, Jin Chen, Jihao Li, Yingchao Feng, Tao Xu, et al. Fair1m: A benchmark dataset for fine- grained object recognition in high-resolution remote sens- ing imagery. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Se...

    2022

  24. [32]

    Fcos: Fully convolutional one-stage object detection

    Zhi Tian, Chunhua Shen, Hao Chen, and Tong He. Fcos: Fully convolutional one-stage object detection. In 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 9626–9635, 2019. 2, 6, 7, 8

    2019

  25. [33]

    Contournet: Taking a fur- ther step toward accurate arbitrary-shaped scene text detec- tion

    Yuxin Wang, Hongtao Xie, Zheng-Jun Zha, Mengting Xing, Zilong Fu, and Yongdong Zhang. Contournet: Taking a fur- ther step toward accurate arbitrary-shaped scene text detec- tion. In proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on com- puter vision and pattern recognition , pages 117...

  26. [34]

    Dota: A large-scale dataset for object detection in aerial images

    Gui-Song Xia, Xiang Bai, Jian Ding, Zhen Zhu, Serge Be- longie, Jiebo Luo, Mihai Datcu, Marcello Pelillo, and Liang- pei Zhang. Dota: A large-scale dataset for object detection in aerial images. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, ...

  27. [35]

    A review of object de- tection based on deep learning

    Youzi Xiao, Zhiqiang Tian, Jiachen Yu, Yinshu Zhang, Shuai Liu, Shaoyi Du, and Xuguang Lan. A review of object de- tection based on deep learning. Multimedia Tools and Appli- cations, 79:23729–23791, 2020. 2

    2020

  28. [36]

    Theoretically achieving continuous representation of oriented bounding boxes

    Zikai Xiao, Guoye Yang, Xue Yang, Taijiang Mu, Junchi Yan, and Shimin Hu. Theoretically achieving continuous representation of oriented bounding boxes. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 16912–16922, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  29. [37]

    Oriented r-cnn for object detection

    Xingxing Xie, Gong Cheng, Jiabao Wang, Xiwen Yao, and Junwei Han. Oriented r-cnn for object detection. InProceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 3520–3529, 2021. 2

    2021

  30. [38]

    Rethinking boundary discon- tinuity problem for oriented object detection

    Hang Xu, Xinyuan Liu, Haonan Xu, Yike Ma, Zunjie Zhu, Chenggang Yan, and Feng Dai. Rethinking boundary discon- tinuity problem for oriented object detection. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition, pages 17406–17415, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  31. [39]

    Gliding vertex on the horizontal bounding box for multi-oriented object detec- tion

    Yongchao Xu, Mingtao Fu, Qimeng Wang, Yukang Wang, Kai Chen, Gui-Song Xia, and Xiang Bai. Gliding vertex on the horizontal bounding box for multi-oriented object detec- tion. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 43(4):1452–1459, 2021. 2

    2021

  32. [40]

    Arbitrary-oriented object de- tection with circular smooth label

    Xue Yang and Junchi Yan. Arbitrary-oriented object de- tection with circular smooth label. In Computer Vision– ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, Au- gust 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part VIII 16, pages 677–694. Springer, 2020. 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8

    2020

  33. [41]

    On the arbitrary-oriented ob- ject detection: Classification based approaches revisited

    Xue Yang and Junchi Yan. On the arbitrary-oriented ob- ject detection: Classification based approaches revisited. In- ternational Journal of Computer Vision, 130(5):1340–1365,

  34. [42]

    Scrdet: Towards more robust detection for small, cluttered and rotated objects

    Xue Yang, Jirui Yang, Junchi Yan, Yue Zhang, Tengfei Zhang, Zhi Guo, Xian Sun, and Kun Fu. Scrdet: Towards more robust detection for small, cluttered and rotated objects. In 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 8231–8240, 2019. 3

    2019

  35. [43]

    Dense label encoding for boundary discontinuity free rotation detection

    Xue Yang, Liping Hou, Yue Zhou, Wentao Wang, and Junchi Yan. Dense label encoding for boundary discontinuity free rotation detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 15819–15829, 2021. 1, 3

    2021

  36. [44]

    R3det: Refined single-stage detector with feature refinement for ro- tating object

    Xue Yang, Junchi Yan, Ziming Feng, and Tao He. R3det: Refined single-stage detector with feature refinement for ro- tating object. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on ar- tificial intelligence, pages 3163–3171, 2021. 2

    2021

  37. [45]

    Rethinking rotated object detection with gaussian wasserstein distance loss

    Xue Yang, Junchi Yan, Qi Ming, Wentao Wang, Xiaopeng Zhang, and Qi Tian. Rethinking rotated object detection with gaussian wasserstein distance loss. In International con- ference on machine learning , pages 11830–11841. PMLR,

  38. [46]

    Learning high-precision bounding box for rotated object detection via kullback- leibler divergence

    Xue Yang, Xiaojiang Yang, Jirui Yang, Qi Ming, Wentao Wang, Qi Tian, and Junchi Yan. Learning high-precision bounding box for rotated object detection via kullback- leibler divergence. Advances in Neural Information Process- ing Systems, 34:18381–18394, 2021. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8

    2021

  39. [47]

    Scrdet++: Detecting small, cluttered and rotated objects via instance-level feature denoising and rota- tion loss smoothing

    Xue Yang, Junchi Yan, Wenlong Liao, Xiaokang Yang, Jin Tang, and Tao He. Scrdet++: Detecting small, cluttered and rotated objects via instance-level feature denoising and rota- tion loss smoothing. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(2):2384–2399...

    2022

  40. [48]

    H2rbox: Horizontal box annotation is all you need for oriented object detection

    Xue Yang, Gefan Zhang, Wentong Li, Xuehui Wang, Yue Zhou, and Junchi Yan. H2rbox: Horizontal box annotation is all you need for oriented object detection. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023. 1, 2

    2023

  41. [49]

    The kfiou loss for rotated object detection

    Xue Yang, Yue Zhou, Gefan Zhang, Jirui Yang, Wentao Wang, Junchi Yan, XIAOPENG ZHANG, and Qi Tian. The kfiou loss for rotated object detection. In International Con- ference on Learning Representations , 2023. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8

    2023

  42. [50]

    Reppoints: Point set representation for object detection

    Ze Yang, Shaohui Liu, Han Hu, Liwei Wang, and Stephen Lin. Reppoints: Point set representation for object detection. In 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 9656–9665, 2019. 2

    2019

  43. [51]

    Detecting texts of arbitrary orientations in natural images

    Cong Yao, Xiang Bai, Wenyu Liu, Yi Ma, and Zhuowen Tu. Detecting texts of arbitrary orientations in natural images. In 2012 IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 1083–1090. IEEE, 2012. 5

    2012

  44. [52]

    Oriented object detection in aerial images with box boundary-aware vectors

    Jingru Yi, Pengxiang Wu, Bo Liu, Qiaoying Huang, Hui Qu, and Dimitris Metaxas. Oriented object detection in aerial images with box boundary-aware vectors. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of com- puter vision, pages 2150–2159, 2021. 2

    2021

  45. [53]

    Phase-shifting coder: Predicting ac- curate orientation in oriented object detection

    Yi Yu and Feipeng Da. Phase-shifting coder: Predicting ac- curate orientation in oriented object detection. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 13354–13363, 2023. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8

    2023

  46. [54]

    Point2rbox: Combine knowledge from synthetic visual patterns for end-to-end oriented object detection with single point supervision

    Yi Yu, Xue Yang, Qingyun Li, Feipeng Da, Jifeng Dai, Yu Qiao, and Junchi Yan. Point2rbox: Combine knowledge from synthetic visual patterns for end-to-end oriented object detection with single point supervision. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and P...

    2024

  47. [55]

    H2rbox-v2: Incorporating symmetry for boost- ing horizontal box supervised oriented object detection

    Yi Yu, Xue Yang, Qingyun Li, Yue Zhou, Feipeng Da, and Junchi Yan. H2rbox-v2: Incorporating symmetry for boost- ing horizontal box supervised oriented object detection. Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1, 2, 6, 7

    2024

  48. [56]

    Dense distinct query for end-to-end object detection

    Shilong Zhang, Xinjiang Wang, Jiaqi Wang, Jiangmiao Pang, Chengqi Lyu, Wenwei Zhang, Ping Luo, and Kai Chen. Dense distinct query for end-to-end object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 7329–7338, 2023. 2

    2023

  49. [57]

    Object detection with deep learning: A review

    Zhong-Qiu Zhao, Peng Zheng, Shou-tao Xu, and Xindong Wu. Object detection with deep learning: A review. IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems , 30 (11):3212–3232, 2019. 1, 2

    2019

  50. [58]

    Mmrotate: A rotated object detection benchmark using pytorch

    Yue Zhou, Xue Yang, Gefan Zhang, Jiabao Wang, Yanyi Liu, Liping Hou, Xue Jiang, Xingzhao Liu, Junchi Yan, Chengqi Lyu, et al. Mmrotate: A rotated object detection benchmark using pytorch. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages 7331–7334, 2...

    2022

  51. [59]

    Object detection in 20 years: A survey.Proceed- ings of the IEEE, 111(3):257–276, 2023

    Zhengxia Zou, Keyan Chen, Zhenwei Shi, Yuhong Guo, and Jieping Ye. Object detection in 20 years: A survey.Proceed- ings of the IEEE, 111(3):257–276, 2023. 2

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.