Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Dual-view X-ray Detection: Can AI Detect Prohibited Items from Dual-view X-ray Images like Humans?

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 A second X-ray view, combined with saliency proposals and category-specific expert detectors, substantially improves detection of difficult prohibited-item categories such as umbrellas.

desk verdict LDXray is a genuinely useful dual-view X-ray benchmark, but AENet's headline claim that the dual-view mechanism drives the gains is not isolated in the experiments. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18082 v1 pith:5SYGXIAS submitted 2024-11-27 cs.CV

Renshuai Tao , Haoyu Wang , Yuzhe Guo , Hairong Chen , Li Zhang , Xianglong Liu , Yunchao Wei , Yao Zhao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords dual-viewX-raydetectionprohibiteditemsecurityinspectionobjectAENetLDXraydatasetsaliencycross-viewcorrespondence
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 the human practice of checking both a vertical and a side X-ray view can be reproduced by a two-pipeline detection network. The main-view pipeline detects ordinary categories; a saliency-based auxiliary-view pipeline proposes candidate regions in the side view, transfers class labels through a fixed horizontal-coordinate correspondence, and passes cropped main-view regions to expert models trained on hard categories. The claim is supported by a new dual-view dataset, LDXray, with 146,997 image pairs and 353,646 instances across 12 categories, and by consistent gains on seven base detectors. The largest reported gain is for umbrellas, whose AP50 rises from 33.9% to 59.0% when RetinaNet is paired with AENet.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing identity is the cross-view coordinate correspondence b*_i(x1,x2)(I1) = lambda b*_i(x1,x2)(I2), together with the class-label correspondence c*_i(I1)=c*_i(I2). This lets an unlabeled auxiliary view be converted into training signal: saliency detection proposes object locations, labels are borrowed from the main view, and the same horizontal projection places those locations back onto the main view to define crops. The auxiliary detector and the category-specific expert models are the two learned components that carry the refinement, because the auxiliary detector localizes candidates and the expert models confirm their category on high-resolution main-view crops.

What would settle it

Collect dual-view images from a scanner whose side view is tilted or whose objects sit at different depths, run the trained AENet without adaptation, and measure the umbrella AP50 gain; if the gain disappears because the projected main-view crops are misaligned, the fixed-scale coordinate assumption is the failing component.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors set out to show that dual-view X-ray images can be used the way human inspectors use them, and they present AENet as the mechanism that does so. The auxiliary view has no ground-truth annotations, so the framework generates pseudo-labels: saliency detection proposes boxes in I2, Eq. 1 transfers the main view's class labels to those boxes under a single scale factor lambda, and the auxiliary detector learns from these labels. At inference, the auxiliary boxes are merged, projected to the main view, cropped, and refined by expert models; the final output unifies the main-view and refined auxiliary detections. The reported result is that hard categories improve substantially, with umbrella AP50 climbing by 20.1 to 25.1 percentage points across base detectors, while already-easy categories stay at the same level.

Load-bearing premise

The entire pipeline depends on the assumption that a single fixed scale factor maps an object's horizontal position in the auxiliary view to its horizontal position in the main view across the whole image.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Adding AENet improves AP50 for the umbrella category by 20.1 to 25.1 percentage points across the seven base detectors, while leaving the simple categories' AP50 unchanged.
  • The gain is architecture-independent: Faster R-CNN, Cascade R-CNN, Sparse R-CNN, RetinaNet, CenterNet, RepPoints, and ATSS all report higher mAP when the auxiliary-view pipeline is added.
  • Saliency-based location approximation outperforms a direct coordinate-conversion baseline as the auxiliary-view proposal method, with mAP rising from 38.2 to 39.1 on the RetinaNet setup.
  • The auxiliary pipeline can recover very hard categories; using Cascade R-CNN as the auxiliary detector yields 78.6% AP50 for umbrellas in that branch alone.
  • LDXray, at 146,997 image pairs and 353,646 instances, is offered as the first large-scale open dual-view detection benchmark for this task.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct consequence the paper does not develop is that the same cross-view projection could serve as a self-supervised pretraining signal on raw dual-view images, without any inspector annotations.
  • If the fixed-scale lambda assumption is violated by other scanner geometries, the reported transfer gains would likely shrink; a per-image or per-depth calibration of the projection would be the natural repair.
  • The dataset's two views could support a stricter test than the paper reports: measuring whether items invisible in the main view are recovered from the auxiliary view, which would isolate the unique contribution of the second view.
  • One could test the saliency proposal stage independently by checking whether the projected auxiliary boxes cover the ground-truth main-view boxes on a held-out set; that coverage number would predict how much of the umbrella gain is due to localization versus expert classification.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces LDXray, a large paired dual-view X-ray dataset containing 146,997 image pairs and 353,646 annotated instances across 12 prohibited-item categories, and proposes AENet, a framework that augments a standard main-view detector with an auxiliary-view pipeline. The auxiliary pipeline uses saliency detection on the second view to generate proposals, pseudo-labels them via a presumed horizontal-coordinate correspondence with the main view, trains an auxiliary detector, and then crops corresponding main-view regions for refinement by category-specific expert classifiers. Experiments on LDXray report consistent AP50 gains over seven base detectors, with the largest gains on hard categories such as umbrellas (e.g., RetinaNet AP50 from 33.9% to 59.0%). The paper also reports ablations on expert model choice, saliency-based localization, auxiliary detector choice, and confidence thresholds.

Significance. If the central attribution claim is established, the contributions are valuable: LDXray appears to be by far the largest dual-view X-ray detection benchmark, and the reported gains are consistent across seven detector architectures on a held-out test set, with code and data promised for release. The evaluation is not circular: expert models are trained on main-view ground-truth crops, and the auxiliary pipeline's pseudo-labels derive from saliency and label transfer on training data, not from test labels. However, the manuscript does not currently isolate the role of the second view: the single-view baseline differs from the full AENet by several components at once, so the headline claim that the dual-view mechanism drives the improvement is not yet supported by the experiments.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5.1.1, Table 3] The central claim that the dual-view mechanism drives the large AP50 gains is not supported by the experimental design. Comparing the base detector row with the '+ours' row changes multiple factors simultaneously: the auxiliary view I2 is added, but so is a saliency proposal stage, an auxiliary detector trained with pseudo-labels, a projection of auxiliary boxes onto I1, and crop-level expert classifiers for hard categories. There is no control that runs the same AENet pipeline with I1 in place of I2, and no comparison to a simple two-view fusion baseline or to an existing dual-view method such as DvXray. Table 5's 'Saliency' row does not resolve this confound: it only varies the location-approximation technique inside the auxiliary pipeline and still uses I2 as the proposal source while retaining expert refinement. Please add a single-view control (all AENet components, but with proposals generated from I1 instead of I2) and at least one non-AENet dual-view fusion baseline. If the single-view control reproduces the umbrella gains of 20-25 percentage points, the claim should be reframed as 'crop/expert refinement improves hard-category detection,' not 'the dual-view mechanism improves detection.'
  2. [Section 4.1, Eq. (1)] The cross-view correspondence model is under-specified. Equation (1), b*_i(x1,x2)(I1) = λ b*_i(x1,x2)(I2), assumes that a single constant scale factor λ relates horizontal coordinates between the two views across the entire image. This is an exact statement only under strong assumptions about scanner geometry (e.g., parallel cameras with no perspective effects and no depth variation). Real X-ray scanners with perspective projection, sensor tilt, or objects at different depths in the luggage will produce position-dependent λ values. Because the auxiliary pipeline crops main-view regions based on this projection, a violation would misalign the expert-refinement crops and directly reduce the reported gains. Please define the notation x1, x2 explicitly, state the scanner geometry that makes Eq. (1) exact, and provide empirical validation such as the distribution of residuals between projected auxiliary-view box centers and ground-truth main-view box centers on the test set.
  3. [Section 5.2.2, Table 5] The ablation in Table 5 is described as comparing location-approximation techniques, but the 'Single-view' row appears to be a different system from the 'Conversion' and 'Saliency' rows, and the table caption does not define what each row contains. Moreover, these rows report COCO-style mAP and AP75 while Table 3 and the surrounding text report AP50; the switch in metric is not explained, making the numbers appear internally inconsistent (e.g., AP50 62.7 vs. 65.1 while mAP is 38.2 vs. 39.1). Please state the metric for each table explicitly, define the 'Single-view' and 'Conversion' settings precisely, and make clear that this table does not provide the isolated single-view control needed for the paper's central claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.2.1, Table 4] The caption of Table 4 lists every expert model as '[24]' (Faster R-CNN); please cite each architecture correctly, e.g., C-RCNN [2], S-RCNN [28], RetinaNet [16], CenterNet [5], RepPoints [36], and ATSS [38].
  2. [Section 4.1] The notation in Eq. (1) and Eq. (3) is ambiguous: b*_i(x1,x2) is called the 'abscissa' of the bounding box, but the notation looks like a two-dimensional box, and Eq. (3) later uses B*_I2(x1,x2) as if it were a set of boxes. Please define the variables x1, x2 and consistently distinguish scalar coordinates from full bounding boxes.
  3. [Section 5.2.4, Figure 6] In the provided manuscript, the text inside Figure 6 appears as encoded glyph sequences (e.g., '/uni00000013/uni00000011/...'), making the figure unreadable. Please ensure fonts are embedded correctly and redraw the figure with legible axis labels and legend.
  4. [Section 3.1] There are minor spelling inconsistencies in category names (e.g., 'Columnar Orange Liquid' appears with variant spellings in different places); please unify the naming and abbreviations across the text, tables, and figures.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No constructional circularity: the dual-view gain is measured on a held-out test set and depends on the auxiliary saliency signal, with only minor evaluation-leak caveats.

full rationale

The derivation chain of AENet does not reduce to its own inputs. The main-view detector and the expert models are trained on training-split ground-truth boxes (Eqs. 5-6), and the auxiliary detector is trained on saliency boxes pseudo-labeled from the main-view training labels (Eqs. 7-10); no test labels enter training. The headline gains are measured on the held-out test split of LDXray (Table 2). The auxiliary view is not decoratively redundant: Table 5 shows that replacing the saliency location technique with 'Conversion' leaves UM at 33.9, while saliency on I2 raises it to 59.0, so the reported improvement is contingent on the I2 signal rather than forced by construction. Likewise, the expert crop models (Table 4) reach UM 94.8, but the final integrated UM is only 59.0, showing that the gain is not simply the expert classifier's training accuracy. The self-citations (refs 29-31) are prior dataset papers in Related Work and are not load-bearing for any equation or claimed derivation. Two caveats are evaluation concerns rather than circularity: the confidence threshold is chosen by inspecting test-set mAP in Sec. 5.2.4, and no single-view control with the same crop/expert machinery is run, so the causal attribution to 'dual-view' is less clean than the headline states. These caveats do not make any equation equivalent to its input.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the correctness of the geometric alignment between views and on the quality of automatically generated auxiliary-view labels. The paper does not provide evidence that the constant-scale assumption holds across the image, nor does it specify the saliency model used to create pseudo-labels. These are plausible assumptions in a fixed scanner setup, but they are load-bearing and unverified in the text.

free parameters (2)
  • λ (horizontal scale factor between views) = not specified in the paper
    Eq. 1 assumes a constant transformation factor λ maps abscissae between the two views. The paper does not state whether λ is known from scanner geometry or estimated from the training set.
  • confidence threshold for auxiliary-view outputs = 0.6
    Section 5.2.4 selects 0.6 as the optimal threshold on the validation data; this is an operating point, not a derived value.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A constant horizontal scale factor λ maps abscissae between the two views across the whole image (Eq. 1).
    Used in Section 4.4 to transfer auxiliary-view locations to main-view crops and to train the auxiliary detector.
  • domain assumption Saliency detection on the auxiliary view yields approximate object locations for the target categories.
    Used as pseudo ground truth for training the auxiliary detector (Eq. 7 in Section 4.4). The saliency model is not specified.
  • domain assumption Class labels can be transferred from detected main-view boxes to auxiliary-view boxes via matching.
    Eq. 8 assumes a matching exists and is correct, but the matching algorithm is not described.
  • domain assumption Expert models trained on main-view crops generalize to crops selected by auxiliary-view proposals.
    Section 4.3 and 4.4 rely on the expert models classifying crops that were proposed by the auxiliary pipeline, which may differ in appearance from ground-truth crops.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dual-view X-ray Detection: Can AI Detect Prohibited Items from Dual-view X-ray Images like Humans?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5SYGXIAS

@misc{pith2026241118082,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dual-view X-ray Detection: Can AI Detect Prohibited Items from Dual-view X-ray Images like Humans?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5SYGXIAS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18082}
}
read the original abstract

To detect prohibited items in challenging categories, human inspectors typically rely on images from two distinct views (vertical and side). Can AI detect prohibited items from dual-view X-ray images in the same way humans do? Existing X-ray datasets often suffer from limitations, such as single-view imaging or insufficient sample diversity. To address these gaps, we introduce the Large-scale Dual-view X-ray (LDXray), which consists of 353,646 instances across 12 categories, providing a diverse and comprehensive resource for training and evaluating models. To emulate human intelligence in dual-view detection, we propose the Auxiliary-view Enhanced Network (AENet), a novel detection framework that leverages both the main and auxiliary views of the same object. The main-view pipeline focuses on detecting common categories, while the auxiliary-view pipeline handles more challenging categories using ``expert models" learned from the main view. Extensive experiments on the LDXray dataset demonstrate that the dual-view mechanism significantly enhances detection performance, e.g., achieving improvements of up to 24.7% for the challenging category of umbrellas. Furthermore, our results show that AENet exhibits strong generalization across seven different detection models for X-ray Inspection

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.18082 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Illustration of the dual-view X-ray detection task. This [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Various categories of objects and corresponding X-ray images from two different views in LDXray. The top row displays natural [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Various distributions. (a) Instance per Category Dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Image quality comparison of current X-ray datasets. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Overview of the AENet framework. This architecture consists of two distinct pipelines: the main view, which follows a traditional [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. DAGNet: A Dual-View Attention-Guided Network for Efficient X-ray Security Inspection

    cs.CV 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    DAGNet, a three-module architecture, improves multi-label contraband classification mAP on the DvXray dual-view X-ray dataset by about 1.5 to 2.4 points over AHCR and 2.5 to 4.8 points over the dual-view baseline.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    On the impact of using x-ray energy response im- agery for object detection via convolutional neural networks

    Neelanjan Bhowmik, Yona Falinie A Gaus, and Toby P Breckon. On the impact of using x-ray energy response im- agery for object detection via convolutional neural networks. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pages 1224–1228. IEEE, 2021. 2

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Cascade r-cnn: Delv- ing into high quality object detection

    Zhaowei Cai and Nuno Vasconcelos. Cascade r-cnn: Delv- ing into high quality object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recogni- tion, pages 6154–6162, 2018. 7

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    MMDetection: Open mmlab detection toolbox and benchmark

    Kai Chen, Jiaqi Wang, Jiangmiao Pang, Yuhang Cao, Yu Xiong, Xiaoxiao Li, Shuyang Sun, Wansen Feng, Ziwei Liu, Jiarui Xu, Zheng Zhang, Dazhi Cheng, Chenchen Zhu, Tian- heng Cheng, Qijie Zhao, Buyu Li, Xin Lu, Rui Zhu, Yue Wu, Jifeng Dai, Jingdong Wang, Jianping Shi, Wanli Ouyang, Chen Change Loy, and Dahua Lin. MMDetection: Open mmlab detection toolbox and...

    arXiv 1906

  4. [4]

    Air- craftverse: A large-scale multimodal dataset of aerial vehi- cle designs

    Adam Cobb, Anirban Roy, Daniel Elenius, Frederick Heim, Brian Swenson, Sydney Whittington, James Walker, Theodore Bapty, Joseph Hite, Karthik Ramani, et al. Air- craftverse: A large-scale multimodal dataset of aerial vehi- cle designs. Advances in Neural Information Processing Sys- tems, 36:44524–44543, 2023. 1

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    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 Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF inter- national conference on computer vision , pages 6569–6578,

  6. [6]

    The pascal visual object classes (voc) challenge

    Mark Everingham, Luc Van Gool, Christopher KI Williams, John Winn, and Andrew Zisserman. The pascal visual object classes (voc) challenge. International journal of computer vision, 88(2):303–338, 2010. 3

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Waymax: An accelerated, data-driven simulator for large-scale autonomous driving research

    Cole Gulino, Justin Fu, Wenjie Luo, George Tucker, Eli Bronstein, Yiren Lu, Jean Harb, Xinlei Pan, Yan Wang, Xi- angyu Chen, et al. Waymax: An accelerated, data-driven simulator for large-scale autonomous driving research. Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Cbanet: Toward com- plexity and bitrate adaptive deep image compression using a single network

    Jinyang Guo, Dong Xu, and Guo Lu. Cbanet: Toward com- plexity and bitrate adaptive deep image compression using a single network. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 32:2049–2062, 2023. 1

    work page 2023

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Multidimen- sional pruning and its extension: a unified framework for model compression

    Jinyang Guo, Dong Xu, and Wanli Ouyang. Multidimen- sional pruning and its extension: a unified framework for model compression. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2023. 1

    2023

  2. [10]

    Lpixray: A large-scale logistics prohibited item x-ray dataset for the application of deep learning in security inspection

    Chengquan He, Tong Mu, Weiping Ren, and Bohua Zhao. Lpixray: A large-scale logistics prohibited item x-ray dataset for the application of deep learning in security inspection. In 2023 International Conference on Computers, Information Processing and Advanced Education (CIPAE) ...

    2023

  3. [11]

    Species196: A one-million semi-supervised dataset for fine-grained species recognition

    Wei He, Kai Han, Ying Nie, Chengcheng Wang, and Yunhe Wang. Species196: A one-million semi-supervised dataset for fine-grained species recognition. Advances in Neural In- formation Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  4. [12]

    Brian K. S. Isaac-Medina, Chris G. Willcocks, and Toby P. Breckon. Multi-view object detection using epipolar con- straints within cluttered x-ray security imagery. In2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR) , pages 9889–9896, 2021. 2

    2021

  5. [13]

    Climateset: A large-scale climate model dataset for machine learning

    Julia Kaltenborn, Charlotte Lange, Venkatesh Ramesh, Philippe Brouillard, Yaniv Gurwicz, Chandni Nagda, Jakob Runge, Peer Nowack, and David Rolnick. Climateset: A large-scale climate model dataset for machine learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 36: 21...

    2023

  6. [14]

    Openassistant conversations-democratizing large lan- guage model alignment

    Andreas K ¨opf, Yannic Kilcher, Dimitri von R ¨utte, Sotiris Anagnostidis, Zhi Rui Tam, Keith Stevens, Abdullah Barhoum, Duc Nguyen, Oliver Stanley, Rich ´ard Nagyfi, et al. Openassistant conversations-democratizing large lan- guage model alignment. Advances in Neural Informat...

    2024

  7. [15]

    Scenarionet: Open-source platform for large-scale traffic scenario simula- tion and modeling

    Quanyi Li, Zhenghao Mark Peng, Lan Feng, Zhizheng Liu, Chenda Duan, Wenjie Mo, and Bolei Zhou. Scenarionet: Open-source platform for large-scale traffic scenario simula- tion and modeling. Advances in neural information process- ing systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  8. [16]

    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. 7

    2017

  9. [17]

    Largest: A benchmark dataset for large-scale traffic forecasting

    Xu Liu, Yutong Xia, Yuxuan Liang, Junfeng Hu, Yiwei Wang, Lei Bai, Chao Huang, Zhenguang Liu, Bryan Hooi, and Roger Zimmermann. Largest: A benchmark dataset for large-scale traffic forecasting. Advances in Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  10. [18]

    Automated segmentation of prohibited items in x-ray baggage images using dense de-overlap atten- tion snake

    Bowen Ma, Tong Jia, Min Su, Xiaodong Jia, Dongyue Chen, and Yichun Zhang. Automated segmentation of prohibited items in x-ray baggage images using dense de-overlap atten- tion snake. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2022. 2

    2022

  11. [19]

    Towards dual-view x-ray bag- gage inspection: A large-scale benchmark and adaptive hi- erarchical cross refinement for prohibited item discovery

    Bowen Ma, Tong Jia, Mingyuan Li, Songsheng Wu, Hao Wang, and Dongyue Chen. Towards dual-view x-ray bag- gage inspection: A large-scale benchmark and adaptive hi- erarchical cross refinement for prohibited item discovery. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security ,

  12. [20]

    Priorband: Practical hyperparameter optimiza- tion in the age of deep learning

    Neeratyoy Mallik, Edward Bergman, Carl Hvarfner, Danny Stoll, Maciej Janowski, Marius Lindauer, Luigi Nardi, and Frank Hutter. Priorband: Practical hyperparameter optimiza- tion in the age of deep learning. Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  13. [21]

    Identi- fiable information (pii)

    Erika McCallister, Tim Grance, and Karen Scarfone. Identi- fiable information (pii). NIST Special Publication, 800:122,

  14. [22]

    Gdxray: The database of x-ray images for nondestructive testing

    Domingo Mery, Vladimir Riffo, Uwe Zscherpel, German Mondrag´on, Iv ´an Lillo, Irene Zuccar, Hans Lobel, and Miguel Carrasco. Gdxray: The database of x-ray images for nondestructive testing. Journal of Nondestructive Evalu- ation, 34(4):42, 2015. 1, 2

    2015

  15. [23]

    Sixray: A large-scale security inspection x-ray benchmark for prohibited item discovery in 9 overlapping images

    Caijing Miao, Lingxi Xie, Fang Wan, Chi Su, Hongye Liu, Jianbin Jiao, and Qixiang Ye. Sixray: A large-scale security inspection x-ray benchmark for prohibited item discovery in 9 overlapping images. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern rec...

    2019

  16. [24]

    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. 7, 8

    2015

  17. [25]

    M5hisdoc: A large-scale multi- style chinese historical document analysis benchmark

    Yongxin Shi, Chongyu Liu, Dezhi Peng, Cheng Jian, Jiarong Huang, and Lianwen Jin. M5hisdoc: A large-scale multi- style chinese historical document analysis benchmark. Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  18. [26]

    Spokenwoz: A large-scale speech-text bench- mark for spoken task-oriented dialogue agents

    Shuzheng Si, Wentao Ma, Haoyu Gao, Yuchuan Wu, Ting- En Lin, Yinpei Dai, Hangyu Li, Rui Yan, Fei Huang, and Yongbin Li. Spokenwoz: A large-scale speech-text bench- mark for spoken task-oriented dialogue agents. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  19. [27]

    Multi- view x-ray r-cnn

    Jan-Martin O Steitz, Faraz Saeedan, and Stefan Roth. Multi- view x-ray r-cnn. In German Conference on Pattern Recog- nition, pages 153–168. Springer, 2018. 2

    2018

  20. [28]

    Sparse r-cnn: End-to-end ob- ject detection with learnable proposals

    Peize Sun, Rufeng Zhang, Yi Jiang, Tao Kong, Chen- feng Xu, Wei Zhan, Masayoshi Tomizuka, Lei Li, Zehuan Yuan, Changhu Wang, et al. Sparse r-cnn: End-to-end ob- ject detection with learnable proposals. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern re...

    2021

  21. [29]

    Towards real-world x-ray security inspection: A high-quality benchmark and lateral inhibition module for prohibited items detection

    Renshuai Tao, Yanlu Wei, Xiangjian Jiang, Hainan Li, Hao- tong Qin, Jiakai Wang, Yuqing Ma, Libo Zhang, and Xi- anglong Liu. Towards real-world x-ray security inspection: A high-quality benchmark and lateral inhibition module for prohibited items detection. In Proceedings of t...

    2021

  22. [30]

    Exploring endogenous shift for cross-domain detec- tion: A large-scale benchmark and perturbation suppression network

    Renshuai Tao, Hainan Li, Tianbo Wang, Yanlu Wei, Yifu Ding, Bowei Jin, Hongping Zhi, Xianglong Liu, and Ais- han Liu. Exploring endogenous shift for cross-domain detec- tion: A large-scale benchmark and perturbation suppression network. In 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer ...

    2022

  23. [31]

    Few-shot x-ray prohibited item detection: A benchmark and weak-feature enhancement net- work

    Renshuai Tao, Tianbo Wang, Ziyang Wu, Cong Liu, Ais- han Liu, and Xianglong Liu. Few-shot x-ray prohibited item detection: A benchmark and weak-feature enhancement net- work. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Con- ference on Multimedia, pages 2012–2020, 2022. 2

    2012

  24. [32]

    Towards real-world prohibited item de- tection: A large-scale x-ray benchmark

    Boying Wang, Libo Zhang, Longyin Wen, Xianglong Liu, and Yanjun Wu. Towards real-world prohibited item de- tection: A large-scale x-ray benchmark. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 5412–5421, 2021. 2

    2021

  25. [33]

    Occluded prohibited items de- tection: An x-ray security inspection benchmark and de- occlusion attention module

    Yanlu Wei, Renshuai Tao, Zhangjie Wu, Yuqing Ma, Libo Zhang, and Xianglong Liu. Occluded prohibited items de- tection: An x-ray security inspection benchmark and de- occlusion attention module. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM international conference on multimedia , pages 138– ...

    2020

  26. [34]

    Dualray: Dual-view x-ray security inspec- tion benchmark and fusion detection framework

    Modi Wu, Feifan Yi, Haigang Zhang, Xinyu Ouyang, and Jinfeng Yang. Dualray: Dual-view x-ray security inspec- tion benchmark and fusion detection framework. In Chi- nese Conference on Pattern Recognition and Computer Vi- sion (PRCV), pages 721–734. Springer, 2022. 2

    2022

  27. [35]

    Deep gradient projection networks for pan-sharpening

    Shuang Xu, Jiangshe Zhang, Zixiang Zhao, Kai Sun, Junmin Liu, and Chunxia Zhang. Deep gradient projection networks for pan-sharpening. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1366–1375, 2021. 1

    2021

  28. [36]

    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 Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 9657–9666, 2019. 7

    2019

  29. [37]

    Collapsed inference for bayesian deep learning

    Zhe Zeng and Guy Van den Broeck. Collapsed inference for bayesian deep learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 1

    2024

  30. [38]

    Bridging the gap between anchor-based and anchor-free detection via adaptive training sample selection

    Shifeng Zhang, Cheng Chi, Yongqiang Yao, Zhen Lei, and Stan Z Li. Bridging the gap between anchor-based and anchor-free detection via adaptive training sample selection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, pages 9759–9768, 2020. 7

    2020

  31. [39]

    Detecting overlapped objects in x-ray secu- rity imagery by a label-aware mechanism.IEEE transactions on information forensics and security, 17:998–1009, 2022

    Cairong Zhao, Liang Zhu, Shuguang Dou, Weihong Deng, and Liang Wang. Detecting overlapped objects in x-ray secu- rity imagery by a label-aware mechanism.IEEE transactions on information forensics and security, 17:998–1009, 2022. 2

    2022

  32. [40]

    Discrete cosine transform network for guided depth map super-resolution

    Zixiang Zhao, Jiangshe Zhang, Shuang Xu, Zudi Lin, and Hanspeter Pfister. Discrete cosine transform network for guided depth map super-resolution. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5697–5707, 2022. 1

    2022

  33. [41]

    Cddfuse: Correlation-driven dual-branch feature decompo- sition for multi-modality image fusion

    Zixiang Zhao, Haowen Bai, Jiangshe Zhang, Yulun Zhang, Shuang Xu, Zudi Lin, Radu Timofte, and Luc Van Gool. Cddfuse: Correlation-driven dual-branch feature decompo- sition for multi-modality image fusion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern...

    2023

Pith tools

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