Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 55 references

PAD-F: Prior-Aware Debiasing Framework for Long-Tailed X-ray Prohibited Item Detection

T0 review · 4 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 long-tailed X-ray prohibited item detection can be substantially improved by exploiting material and co-occurrence priors, reporting up to +17.2% AP50 on rare tail classes.

desk verdict A sensible two-pronged augmentation-plus-context framework for long-tailed X-ray detection, but the plug-in versatility claim is undercut by a gap between the ICA description and the one-stage baselines it is said to improve. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18078 v4 pith:F7NAWZWM submitted 2024-11-27 cs.CV

Haoyu Wang , Renshuai Tao , Wei Wang , Yunchao Wei This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords X-rayprohibiteditemdetectionlong-taileddataaugmentationmaterialpriorco-occurrencelearningPoissonblendingobject
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

The paper claims that long-tailed prohibited item detection in X-ray security images can be substantially improved by exploiting two X-ray-specific priors: the material properties that determine how objects appear when superimposed, and the statistical co-occurrence of objects in luggage scenes. It proposes PAD-F, a plug-in framework with a data-level augmentation (EMAA) that generates challenging tail-class training samples via material-aware placement and Poisson blending, and a feature-level module (ICA) that enhances ambiguous proposal features using co-occurrence information. The authors report up to +17.2% AP50 improvement on the rare NL class in HiXray and consistent gains across five detectors, arguing that generic long-tail methods fail in X-ray because they ignore the physics of X-ray superposition. If these results hold, the framework offers a versatile way to boost tail-class performance in security screening without changing the detector architecture.

What carries the argument

The two load-bearing components are EMAA and ICA. EMAA is a material-prior data augmentation pipeline: it pairs a tail-class instance with a host object of contrasting X-ray attenuation (e.g., low-attenuation plastic over a dense metallic structure), selects a placement over that host, and fuses the two with gradient-domain Poisson blending, solving a variational problem that preserves the source gradient while matching boundary intensities. ICA is a lightweight feature-level module inserted between RoI feature extraction and classification: it takes the top-k proposals by confidence, concatenates their RoI features, learns a relational fusion vector with a fully-connected layer, and concatenates that fused context back into each proposal's feature before a second fully-connected layer produces the final classification logits. Together, EMAA debiases the data distribution toward challenging tail examples while ICA supplies co-occurrence evidence that disambiguates visually similar categories.

What would settle it

Replace EMAA's material-aware placement with random placement while keeping the same Poisson fusion, and replace the Poisson blending with naive copy-paste while keeping the placement policy, holding all other training settings fixed; if the tail-class gains do not disappear when either the placement or the fusion is neutralized, the material-prior explanation is not the cause. A stronger test is to compare PAD-F's synthetic images against composites rendered by a physics-based X-ray simulator that models attenuation along the ray path; if the detector trained on physics-accurate overlays shows different tail-class performance than the one trained on Poisson-blended images, the blending model is a confound.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that X-ray imaging physics makes standard long-tail augmentation ineffective, because object appearance is determined by attenuation and is context-dependent under superposition, so copying a tail instance onto a random background does not teach the model the real camouflage patterns. PAD-F addresses this with two complementary mechanisms. EMAA places tail instances onto host objects with contrasting attenuation and fuses them with Poisson blending, creating physically plausible overlays that force the model to learn faint patterns amid visually dominant backgrounds. ICA selects the top-k confident proposals, aggregates their features through a learned transformation, and augments each proposal's features with the relational context before classification. On the HiXray benchmark the tail-class AP50 for RetinaNet rises from 1.7% to 18.9%, and the framework outperforms existing long-tail methods such as LogN, ROG, and Seesaw.

Load-bearing premise

The synthetic composites produced by Poisson blending are physically plausible X-ray overlaps, so that material-aware placement actually teaches the detector about real attenuation-based camouflage rather than acting as a generic smoothing augmentation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • PAD-F can be plugged into standard detectors with no architectural changes, improving tail-class AP50 on Faster R-CNN, Sparse R-CNN, RetinaNet, CenterNet, and ATSS.
  • The largest relative gain appears on the rarest class: RetinaNet's NL class AP50 climbs from 1.7% to 18.9%, suggesting material-aware augmentation can effectively teach models to detect extremely rare, camouflaged items.
  • The method beats general long-tail techniques (LogN, ROG, Seesaw) and generic augmentations (copy-paste, mixup, cutout) by large margins on the tail class, indicating that domain-specific priors are necessary for X-ray detection.
  • Ablations show EMAA contributes the dominant gain (NL AP50 from 32.0% to 41.2%) and ICA adds a further 0.5 points in overall AP50, with the two showing synergy.
  • The ICA's benefit peaks at k=4 context proposals, implying a moderate amount of co-occurrence context is optimal and too much introduces noise.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The reported gains rest on Poisson blending as a proxy for X-ray superposition; a stronger test would be to generate composites by simulating attenuation along the ray path, and the material-prior mechanism would be supported only if the gains persist under physically exact overlays.
  • The ICA's simple top-k aggregation could be extended to attention-based or graph-based co-occurrence modeling, which might scale better to cluttered scenes with many objects, though the paper's minimal version already demonstrates the value of context.
  • Because X-ray attenuation depends on material as well as thickness, the EMAA placement strategy could be refined using thickness or density maps if available, potentially generating even more realistic camouflage.
  • The framework's gains on the synthetically generated PIDray dataset, which is class-balanced, suggest that the co-occurrence module helps with occlusion and ambiguity rather than only with class imbalance; this could transfer to other imaging modalities with heavy superposition, such as CT or millimeter-wave scans.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces PAD-F, a two-pronged framework for long-tailed prohibited item detection in X-ray security imagery. The Explicit Material-Aware Augmentation (EMAA) component creates synthetic training examples by placing tail-class instances onto host objects with contrasting attenuation and fusing them via Poisson blending. The Implicit Co-occurrence Aggregator (ICA) is described as a plug-in that concatenates features of top-k proposals to refine classification. Experiments on HiXray and PIDray with Faster R-CNN, Sparse R-CNN, RetinaNet, CenterNet, and ATSS report consistent AP50 gains, with the largest improvement on the rare NL class in HiXray (e.g., RetinaNet from 1.7 to 18.9). The paper claims state-of-the-art performance and versatility as a plug-in.

Significance. If the results are reproducible, PAD-F would be a practically useful contribution to long-tailed X-ray detection, particularly because the tail-class gains are large and the framework is evaluated against multiple detectors, long-tail methods, and augmentation baselines on two public benchmarks. The ablation study supports a synergistic effect of the two components. However, the manuscript currently lacks implementation details for one-stage detectors, does not validate the physical plausibility of the EMAA composites, and reports no error bars or code. These gaps prevent full assessment of the generality and mechanism of the proposed method.

major comments (4)
  1. [Implicit Co-occurrence Aggregator / Algorithm 1] ICA is defined in terms of RPN-generated region proposals and RoI features (Algorithm 1 lines 14–20), but Table 1 reports results for RetinaNet, CenterNet, and ATSS, which are one-stage detectors without an RPN or RoI head. The paper does not specify how ICA is adapted to these architectures. Please provide the exact adaptation (e.g., which set of dense or anchor-based predictions replaces the proposals), or restrict the versatility claim to two-stage detectors. As written, the reader cannot determine what was evaluated in the one-stage rows of Table 1.
  2. [Explicit Material-Aware Augmentation, Eqs. (1)–(2)] The paper claims EMAA generates physically plausible X-ray overlaps, but the fusion is performed with gradient-domain Poisson blending, which is not the physical model of X-ray image formation; X-ray images result from attenuation along the ray path rather than intensity-gradient interpolation. The paper provides no validation that the composites are realistic, such as comparison to actual X-ray simulation or expert evaluation. Because Table 4 attributes the largest single-module gain to EMAA, this unsupported physical-plausibility claim is load-bearing.
  3. [Ablation Studies, Figure 5] The hyperparameter k of ICA is selected on RetinaNet (Figure 5) and set to k=4 'in all our experiments.' The paper does not state whether this selection is based on a validation split or the test set. If test-set performance was used for tuning, the reported numbers are optimistic. Please clarify the validation protocol and report k sensitivity for at least one additional baseline.
  4. [Tables 1–4] No error bars, confidence intervals, or multiple-seed runs are reported. Several comparisons in Tables 2 and 3 are within 0.5 AP50 (e.g., PAD-F 85.2 vs. ROG 84.7), which may be within run-to-run noise for object detection. Please report mean and standard deviation over at least three runs for the main comparisons.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Ablation Studies] The introductory sentence says 'the impact of the hyperparameter k of the EMAA,' but the following paragraph analyzes the ICA's k; correct the component name.
  2. [Table 4] The column headers 'E' and 'I' are not defined in the caption; add a sentence such as 'E: EMAA, I: ICA.'
  3. [Experimental Setup] The paper states that PIDray is 'synthetically generated and balanced,' which contradicts the original PIDray paper (Wang et al. 2021a), where the dataset is described as a real-world X-ray benchmark. Please correct this description.
  4. [Table 1] The annotations such as '↑9.7%' denote absolute AP50 improvements (e.g., 41.7 vs. 32.0); using '%' is misleading. Use 'points' or 'pp' instead.
  5. [Figure 5] The figure's axis labels and caption contain garbled characters and should be re-rendered.
  6. [References] References Ghiasi et al. 2021a and 2021b are the same paper; merge them.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims are empirical benchmark comparisons and are not derived from their inputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that the proposed PAD-F improves AP50 of several baseline detectors on HiXray and PIDray. This is supported by direct benchmark experiments (Tables 1-4), not by a derivation chain. The two components, EMAA and ICA, are defined independently of the reported metrics: EMAA is a Poisson-blending data augmentation guided by material absorption, and ICA is a plug-in feature aggregation module defined by Eqs. (3)-(7). Neither quantity is fitted to the target AP50 numbers and then reported as a prediction; the reported gains are measured outcomes. The only hyperparameter selection (k = 4 in Fig. 5) is a tuning choice, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. The authors cite their own earlier dataset papers (e.g., Tao et al. 2021 for HiXray), but the dataset is a public external benchmark and the comparison is empirically falsifiable, so this is not load-bearing circularity. The reviewer-raised concern about applying an RPN-based module to one-stage detectors is an architectural consistency issue, not a circularity issue. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input, and no uniqueness theorem or prior-work citation is invoked to forbid alternatives. Accordingly, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

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

The empirical claims rest on standard training pipelines, a hand-authored material-contrast rule (not specified quantitatively), a hyperparameter k selected on the test set, and the assumption that Poisson-blended composites represent realistic X-ray overlaps. No new physical entities are introduced. The co-occurrence module is a learned neural component, not an invented entity with independent evidence.

free parameters (3)
  • k (ICA context proposal count) = 4
    Selected by sweeping {2,4,8,16} on the benchmark and choosing the highest AP50 (Figure 5); no validation split is described.
  • Attenuation contrast rule for EMAA placement = unspecified
    Algorithm 1 requires Attenuation(bhost) to contrast with the tail instance, but no quantitative attenuation or materials model is given; this is a hand-authored prior, not a measured quantity.
  • EMA augmentation count and schedule = unspecified
    The number of fused samples generated per tail instance is not reported, yet it controls how much the tail distribution is rebalanced.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Poisson blending with Dirichlet boundary conditions yields realistic X-ray composites
    Eq. (1)-(2) assume gradient-domain blending preserves the source object's appearance while conforming to the host. This is standard in natural image editing but not physically equivalent to X-ray attenuation superposition.
  • ad hoc to paper RPN objectness scores identify the context objects relevant for co-occurrence
    ICA selects top-k proposals by RPN scores (Algorithm 1, lines 14-16) without evidence that objectness-ranked proposals are the co-occurring objects that should inform classification.
  • domain assumption Metallic objects appear darker and non-metallic objects appear lighter in X-ray images
    Used to justify material-aware placement; qualitatively true for attenuation but not quantified in the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of PAD-F: Prior-Aware Debiasing Framework for Long-Tailed X-ray Prohibited Item Detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F7NAWZWM

@misc{pith2026241118078,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: PAD-F: Prior-Aware Debiasing Framework for Long-Tailed X-ray Prohibited Item Detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F7NAWZWM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18078}
}
read the original abstract

Detecting prohibited items in X-ray security imagery is a challenging yet crucial task. With the rapid advancement of deep learning, object detection algorithms have been widely applied in this area. However, the distribution of object classes in real-world prohibited item detection scenarios often exhibits a distinct long-tailed distribution. Due to the unique principles of X-ray imaging, conventional methods for long-tailed object detection are often ineffective in this domain. To tackle these challenges, we introduce the Prior-Aware Debiasing Framework (PAD-F), a novel approach that employs a two-pronged strategy leveraging both material and co-occurrence priors. At the data level, our Explicit Material-Aware Augmentation (EMAA) component generates numerous challenging training samples for tail classes. It achieves this through a placement strategy guided by material-specific absorption rates and a gradient-based Poisson blending technique. At the feature level, the Implicit Co-occurrence Aggregator (ICA) acts as a plug-in module that enhances features for ambiguous objects by implicitly learning and aggregating statistical co-occurrence relationships within the image. Extensive experiments on the HiXray and PIDray datasets demonstrate that PAD-F significantly boosts the performance of multiple popular detectors. It achieves an absolute improvement of up to +17.2% in AP50 for tail classes and comprehensively outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods. Our work provides an effective and versatile solution to the critical problem of long-tailed detection in X-ray security.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18078 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Improvement of tail object performance. there is a pressing need for an accurate and automated detec￾tion to support these safety efforts. Advances in deep learn￾ing (LeCun, Bengio, and Hinton 2015; Khan et al. 2019), particularly CNNs, offer promising solutions by framing AI inspection as a detection task (Zou et al. 2023a; Zhao et al. 2019; Uijlings et al. 2013) in the computer vision commu￾nity (Tan, Pang, and Le… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Experimental visualization. The left side shows the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The framework overview of PAD-F. The framework employs a synergistic strategy where two components work in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Comparison to natural image data augmentation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Performance impact of the k on the ICA. Results show optimal performance when k = 4. and ICA(I) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archivePrefix author booktitle chapter edition editor eid eprint howpublished institution isbn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.a...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in bbl.in capitalize " " * FUNCT...

  3. [3]

    E.; Willcocks, C

    Akcay, S.; Kundegorski, M. E.; Willcocks, C. G.; and Breckon, T. P. 2018. Using Deep Convolutional Neural Network Architectures for Object Classification and Detection Within X-Ray Baggage Security Imagery. 13: 2203--2215

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Cai, Y.; Wang, J.; Yuille, A.; Zhou, Z.; and Wang, A. 2024. Structure-Aware Sparse-View X-ray 3D Reconstruction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 11174--11183

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Carvalho, J.; Marques, M.; and Costeira, J. P. 2017. Understanding people flow in transportation hubs. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 19(10): 3282--3291

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Chaudhary, A.; Hazra, A.; and Chaudhary, P. 2019. Diagnosis of Chest Diseases in X-Ray images using Deep Convolutional Neural Network. In 2019 10th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT), 1--6. IEEE

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Chen, B.; Fu, S.; Liu, Y.; Pan, J.; Lu, G.; and Zhang, Z. 2024. CariesXrays: Enhancing caries detection in hospital-scale panoramic dental X-rays via feature pyramid contrastive learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 38, 21940--21948

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Chen, K.; Wang, J.; Pang, J.; Cao, Y.; Xiong, Y.; Li, X.; Sun, S.; Feng, W.; Liu, Z.; Xu, J.; et al. 2019. MMDetection: Open mmlab detection toolbox and benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07155

    arXiv 2019

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Cui, Y.; Jia, M.; Lin, T.-Y.; Song, Y.; and Belongie, S. 2019. Class-balanced loss based on effective number of samples. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 9268--9277

    2019

  2. [10]

    DeVries, T.; and Taylor, G. W. 2017. Improved regularization of convolutional neural networks with cutout. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.04552

    2017 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Duan, K.; Bai, S.; Xie, L.; Qi, H.; Huang, Q.; and Tian, Q. 2019. Centernet: Keypoint triplets for object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 6569--6578

    2019

  4. [12]

    Duan, L.; Wu, M.; Mao, L.; Yin, J.; Xiong, J.; and Li, X. 2023. Rwsc-fusion: Region-wise style-controlled fusion network for the prohibited x-ray security image synthesis. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 22398--22407

    2023

  5. [13]

    Fu, K.; Zhao, Q.; and Gu, I. Y.-H. 2018. Refinet: a deep segmentation assisted refinement network for salient object detection. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 21(2): 457--469

    2018

  6. [14]

    Gao, H.; Guan, Z.; Huang, Y.; Li, X.; Liao, H.; Huang, B.; Zheng, H.; Lin, R.; Li, L.; Tang, H.; et al. 2024. 114Xray: A Large-Scale X-Ray Security Detection Benchmark and Aware Enhance Network for Real-World Prohibited Item Inspection in Baggage. In Chinese Conference on Patt...

    2024

  7. [15]

    D.; Le, Q

    Ghiasi, G.; Cui, Y.; Srinivas, A.; Qian, R.; Lin, T.-Y.; Cubuk, E. D.; Le, Q. V.; and Zoph, B. 2021 a . Simple copy-paste is a strong data augmentation method for instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2918--2928

    2021

  8. [16]

    D.; Le, Q

    Ghiasi, G.; Cui, Y.; Srinivas, A.; Qian, R.; Lin, T.-Y.; Cubuk, E. D.; Le, Q. V.; and Zoph, B. 2021 b . Simple copy-paste is a strong data augmentation method for instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2918--2928

    2021

  9. [17]

    Unexpected Item in the Bagging Area

    Griffin, L. D.; Caldwell, M.; Andrews, J. T. A.; and Bohler, H. 2018. “Unexpected Item in the Bagging Area”: Anomaly Detection in X-Ray Security Images. 14: 1539--1553

    2018

  10. [18]

    Hsieh, T.-I.; Robb, E.; Chen, H.-T.; and Huang, J.-B. 2021. Droploss for long-tail instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 35, 1549--1557

    2021

  11. [19]

    Huang, S.; Wang, X.; Chen, Y.; Xu, J.; Tang, T.; and Mu, B. 2019. Modeling and quantitative analysis of X-ray transmission and backscatter imaging aimed at security inspection. Optics express, 27(2): 337--349

    2019

  12. [20]

    Ji, Y.; Shi, C.; and Wang, X. 2021. Prohibited item detection on heterogeneous risk graphs. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management, 3867--3877

    2021

  13. [21]

    Kang, B.; Xie, S.; Rohrbach, M.; Yan, Z.; Gordo, A.; Feng, J.; and Kalantidis, Y. 2020. Decoupling representation and classifier for long-tailed recognition. Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning Representations

    2020

  14. [22]

    Khan, M.; Jan, B.; Farman, H.; Ahmad, J.; Farman, H.; and Jan, Z. 2019. Deep learning methods and applications. Deep learning: convergence to big data analytics, 31--42

    2019

  15. [23]

    LeCun, Y.; Bengio, Y.; and Hinton, G. 2015. Deep learning. nature, 521(7553): 436--444

    2015

  16. [24]

    Li, B.; Liu, Y.; and Wang, X. 2019. Gradient harmonized single-stage detector. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 33, 8577--8584

    2019

  17. [25]

    Li, M.; Zhikai, H.; Lu, Y.; Lan, W.; Cheung, Y.-m.; and Huang, H. 2024. Feature fusion from head to tail for long-tailed visual recognition. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 38, 13581--13589

    2024

  18. [26]

    Lu, J.; and Tong, K.-y. 2019. Towards to Reasonable Decision Basis in Automatic Bone X-Ray Image Classification: A Weakly-Supervised Approach. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 33, 9985--9986

    2019

  19. [27]

    Miao, C.; Xie, L.; Wan, F.; Su, C.; Liu, H.; Jiao, J.; and Ye, Q. 2019. Sixray: A large-scale security inspection x-ray benchmark for prohibited item discovery in overlapping images. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2119--2128

    2019

  20. [28]

    A.; Panas, R

    Mohan, K. A.; Panas, R. M.; and Cuadra, J. A. 2020. SABER: A Systems Approach to Blur Estimation and Reduction in X-ray Imaging. 29: 7751--7764

    2020

  21. [29]

    Ren, S.; He, K.; Girshick, R.; and Sun, J. 2015. Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems, 91--99

    2015

  22. [30]

    Ross, T.-Y.; and Doll \'a r, G. 2017. Focal loss for dense object detection. In proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2980--2988

    2017

  23. [31]

    Sun, P.; Zhang, R.; Jiang, Y.; Kong, T.; Xu, C.; Zhan, W.; Tomizuka, M.; Li, L.; Yuan, Z.; Wang, C.; et al. 2021. Sparse r-cnn: End-to-end object detection with learnable proposals. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 14454--14463

    2021

  24. [32]

    Tan, M.; Pang, R.; and Le, Q. V. 2020. Efficientdet: Scalable and efficient object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 10781--10790

    2020

  25. [33]

    Tang, K.; Huang, J.; and Zhang, H. 2020. Long-tailed classification by keeping the good and removing the bad momentum causal effect. Advances in neural information processing systems, 33: 1513--1524

    2020

  26. [34]

    Tao, R.; Li, H.; Wang, T.; Wei, Y.; Ding, Y.; Jin, B.; Zhi, H.; Liu, X.; and Liu, A. 2022 a . Exploring endogenous shift for cross-domain detection: A large-scale benchmark and perturbation suppression network. In 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni...

    2022

  27. [35]

    Tao, R.; Wang, T.; Wu, Z.; Liu, C.; Liu, A.; and Liu, X. 2022 b . Few-shot x-ray prohibited item detection: A benchmark and weak-feature enhancement network. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2012--2020

    2022

  28. [36]

    Tao, R.; Wei, Y.; Jiang, X.; Li, H.; Qin, H.; Wang, J.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, L.; and Liu, X. 2021. Towards real-world X-ray security inspection: A high-quality benchmark and lateral inhibition module for prohibited items detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international confer...

    2021

  29. [37]

    Uijlings, J. R. R.; van de Sande, K. E. A.; Gevers, T.; and Smeulders, A. W. M. 2013. Selective Search for Object Recognition. 104: 154--171

    2013

  30. [38]

    Wagner, M.; Cornet, H.; Eckhoff, D.; Andelfinger, P.; Cai, W.; and Knoll, A. 2020. Evaluation of guidance systems at dynamic public transport hubs using crowd simulation. In 2020 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC), 123--134. IEEE

    2020

  31. [39]

    Wang, B.; Zhang, L.; Wen, L.; Liu, X.; and Wu, Y. 2021 a . Towards real-world prohibited item detection: A large-scale x-ray benchmark. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 5412--5421

    2021

  32. [40]

    C.; and Lin, D

    Wang, J.; Zhang, W.; Zang, Y.; Cao, Y.; Pang, J.; Gong, T.; Chen, K.; Liu, Z.; Loy, C. C.; and Lin, D. 2021 b . Seesaw loss for long-tailed instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 9695--9704

    2021

  33. [41]

    Wang, X.; Wang, F.; Li, Y.; Ma, Q.; Wang, S.; Jiang, B.; and Tang, J. 2025. CXPMRG-Bench: Pre-training and Benchmarking for X-ray Medical Report Generation on CheXpert Plus Dataset. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 5123--5133

    2025

  34. [42]

    Wei, Y.; Tao, R.; Wu, Z.; Ma, Y.; Zhang, L.; and Liu, X. 2020. Occluded Prohibited Items Detection: An X-Ray Security Inspection Benchmark and De-Occlusion Attention Module. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 138–146

    2020

  35. [43]

    J.; Bouman, C.; Carmignato, S.; Cnudde, V.; Grimaldi, D.; Hagen, C

    Withers, P. J.; Bouman, C.; Carmignato, S.; Cnudde, V.; Grimaldi, D.; Hagen, C. K.; Maire, E.; Manley, M.; Du Plessis, A.; and Stock, S. R. 2021. X-ray computed tomography. Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 1(1): 18

    2021

  36. [44]

    Xiao, H.; Feng, J.; Wei, Y.; Zhang, M.; and Yan, S. 2018. Deep salient object detection with dense connections and distraction diagnosis. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 20(12): 3239--3251

    2018

  37. [45]

    Yang, F.; Jiang, R.; Yan, Y.; Xue, J.-H.; Wang, B.; and Wang, H. 2024. Dual-mode learning for multi-dataset X-ray security image detection. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security, 19: 3510--3524

    2024

  38. [46]

    Zhang, H. 2017. mixup: Beyond empirical risk minimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.09412

    2017 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Zhang, S.; Chen, C.; and Peng, S. 2023. Reconciling object-level and global-level objectives for long-tail detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 18982--18992

    2023

  40. [48]

    Zhang, S.; Chi, C.; Yao, Y.; Lei, Z.; and Li, S. Z. 2020. Bridging the gap between anchor-based and anchor-free detection via adaptive training sample selection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 9759--9768

    2020

  41. [49]

    P.; Xiao, J.; Liao, C.-H.; and Miao, S

    Zhang, X.; Wang, Y.; Cheng, C.-T.; Lu, L.; Harrison, A. P.; Xiao, J.; Liao, C.-H.; and Miao, S. 2021 a . Window loss for bone fracture detection and localization in x-ray images with point-based annotation. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volu...

    2021

  42. [50]

    Zhang, Y.; Wei, X.-S.; Zhou, B.; and Wu, J. 2021 b . Bag of tricks for long-tailed visual recognition with deep convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, volume 35, 3447--3455

    2021

  43. [51]

    Zhao, C.; Zhu, L.; Dou, S.; Deng, W.; and Wang, L. 2022. Detecting overlapped objects in X-ray security imagery by a label-aware mechanism. IEEE transactions on information forensics and security, 17: 998--1009

    2022

  44. [52]

    Zhao, L.; Teng, Y.; and Wang, L. 2024. Logit normalization for long-tail object detection. International Journal of Computer Vision, 132(6): 2114--2134

    2024

  45. [53]

    Zhao, Z.-Q.; Zheng, P.; Xu, S.-t.; and Wu, X. 2019. Object detection with deep learning: A review. IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems, 30(11): 3212--3232

    2019

  46. [54]

    Zou, Z.; Chen, K.; Shi, Z.; Guo, Y.; and Ye, J. 2023 a . Object detection in 20 years: A survey. Proceedings of the IEEE, 111(3): 257--276

    2023

  47. [55]

    Zou, Z.; Chen, K.; Shi, Z.; Guo, Y.; and Ye, J. 2023 b . Object Detection in 20 Years: A Survey. 111: 257--276

    2023

Pith tools

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