Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 86 references

CSPENet: Contour-Aware and Saliency Priors Embedding Network for Infrared Small Target Detection

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read By freezing hand-crafted surround-convergent gradient kernels into a U-shaped network, CSPENet reports the highest detection probability on three public infrared small-target benchmarks.

desk verdict The paper's central 'multi-directional surround-convergent prior' is mathematically inert—Eq. (2) collapses all 24 orientations to one isotropic gradient magnitude—so the story and ablations misinterpret the module, though the empirical engineering may still have value. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.09943 v1 pith:L6XDHRQG submitted 2025-05-15 cs.CV

Jiakun Deng , Kexuan Li , Xingye Cui , Jiaxuan Li , Chang Long , Tian Pu , Zhenming Peng This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords infraredsmalltargetdetectionsurround-convergentpriorGaussianderivativekernelssaliencyembeddingcontour-awaredual-brancharchitectureattention-guidedenhancement
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

This paper claims that infrared small targets leave a reproducible gradient signature—nearby edge pixels point inward toward a brighter center—and that a detection network alerted to this signature performs better on dim, irregularly shaped targets than networks that must learn everything from data. The authors build CSPENet, which extracts that 'surround-convergent' structure with fixed multi-directional Gaussian derivative kernels at three scales, producing a saliency prior for localization and multi-scale structural priors for contour detail, and embeds the two priors at different depths of a U-shaped segmentation network. On the NUDT-SIRST, IRSTD-1k, and NUAA-SIRST benchmarks, the method reports the highest probability of detection among all compared detectors, with detection-probability gains over the MDIGCNet baseline of 1.85, 2.02, and 3.31 points, stronger F1 on all three datasets, and stronger IoU on two of the three. If the claim is right, it shows a practical route for injecting interpretable physical priors about infrared imagery into deep learning without sacrificing end-to-end training.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the Surround-Convergent Prior Extraction Module (SCPEM), built from Multi-directional Gradient Magnitude Calculation Blocks (MGMCBs). Each MGMCB convolves the input with Gaussian derivative kernels $\mathrm{GD}(x,y,\sigma_G,\theta_G)=-\frac{G(x,y,\sigma_G)}{\sigma_G^2}(x\cos\theta_G+y\sin\theta_G)$, combining responses from orthogonal directions into a gradient magnitude tensor, and stacks 24 orientation channels at three kernel scales (3×3, 5×5, 7×7). These kernels are implemented as depth-wise convolutions whose weights are initialized from the analytic formulas and kept frozen during training, so the prior is never revised by gradient descent. The block's outputs feed two extraction paths: PKE1 yields the single-channel boosted saliency prior CP1, concatenated with the input image; PKE2 yields multi-scale contour priors CP2_i, injected into deep features through CHKIM's asymmetric top-down and bottom-up gating. The final AGFEM fuses the pyramid of features with channel and spatial attention plus a residual connection. The design's purpose is to let a small, 1.44M-parameter network spend its capacity on combining the priors rather than relearning them.

What would settle it

Retrain CSPENet on NUDT-SIRST with the MGMCB depth-wise convolution weights unfrozen so the surrounding-convergent kernels become learnable, and compare against the frozen version on the same test split; if the learnable version matches or beats the frozen one in detection probability, then the fixed prior is not the source of the gains. A complementary control: flip the contrast of the test images so target centers are darker than their surroundings; a large performance drop would indicate the frozen prior is doing causal work rather than being incidental.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that explicitly encoding a surround-convergent structure prior—the observation that infrared small targets are brightest at the center and have contour-pixel gradients pointing inward—improves both target localization and contour fidelity, and that freezing the kernels that detect this structure rather than learning them preserves the prior while remaining trainable. The SCPEM module computes multi-directional gradient magnitude tensors with Gaussian derivative kernels at 24 orientations and scales 3×3, 5×5, and 7×7, then splits the result into CP1 (a boosted saliency map to guide localization) and CP2 (multi-scale structural priors to enrich contour details). CP1 is concatenated with the input image; CP2 is fused with deep features through CHKIM's asymmetric interaction; and AGFEM re-weights the aggregated multi-layer features. On NUDT-SIRST, IRSTD-1k, and NUAA-SIRST, CSPENet achieves detection probabilities of 98.52%, 93.27%, and 96.96%, the best of the compared methods, while keeping the model at 1.44M parameters. On IRSTD-1k, the IoU of 66.79% sits below both RPCANet's 66.93% and MDIGCNet's 67.09%, so the claimed superiority means leading on detection probability and F1 on all three datasets and on IoU on two of them, rather than strict dominance in every metric.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that infrared small targets genuinely exhibit a surround-convergent gradient structure—bright center with contour gradients pointing inward—across the three test distributions, and that freezing hand-designed Gaussian derivative kernels at scales 3, 5 and 7 exploits this better than letting the network learn its own filters.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On NUDT-SIRST, adding SCPEM raises the DNIM backbone from 90.39 IoU / 95.92 F1 / 97.57 Pd to 94.18 / 97.00 / 98.52, quantifying how much of the reported improvement comes from the prior embedding itself.
  • The ablation over classical priors (Top-hat, LCM, MPCM, IPI, PSTNN) shows SCPEM leads on all three datasets by at least 1.84 IoU, 0.51 F1, 0.34 Pd, and lower false-alarm rates, indicating the learned-but-frozen prior is a better fusion token than classical preprocessing outputs.
  • Using both CP1 and CP2 together beats either alone on IoU, F1, and Pd across all three datasets, implying the saliency and contour priors carry complementary information; a model that dropped one branch would lose a share of the benefit.
  • The reported gains in detection probability over MDIGCNet (+1.85, +2.02, +3.31 points) come with fewer parameters (1.44M vs 1.505M) but more computation (9.49 vs 6.557 GFLOPs), so the practical advantage is accuracy, not speed.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the kernel scales (3, 5, 7), orientation count (24), and embedding positions were selected and evaluated on the same three benchmarks, an independent evaluation on new infrared sequences—say, airborne or maritime data captured with a different camera—would reveal whether the fixed design choices generalize or are tuned to these datasets.
  • The same frozen surround-convergent kernel bank might transfer to other small-object-at-low-SNR problems such as faint astronomical source detection or micro-lesion finding in medical images, provided the objects share the bright-center gradient profile; a quick test would be reusing the SCPEM weights unchanged and retraining only the fusion layers.
  • The authors' own conclusion flags subpixel targets and unstructured contours as limitations, so the claim should be read as covering targets that resolve into a few structured pixels rather than single bright dots; subpixel cases would be a natural stress test that the current benchmarks do not isolate.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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 manuscript proposes CSPENet, a deep network for infrared small target detection that embeds hand-designed priors into a U-Net-style backbone. The method has three main components: SCPEM, which uses multi-scale fixed Gaussian derivative kernels to produce two prior maps (a single-channel saliency prior CP1 and multi-scale structural priors CP2); DBPEA, which embeds CP1 at the network input and CP2 into the hierarchical decoder features through CHKIM; and AGFEM, an attention-guided feature enhancement module. The authors report experiments on NUDT-SIRST, IRSTD-1K, and NUAA-SIRST, comparing against model-driven and deep-learning baselines, and claim that CSPENet outperforms state-of-the-art methods. The code is released.

Significance. If the empirical results hold, CSPENet offers a lightweight prior-guided detector with genuine gains on the detection-probability metric and competitive pixel-level metrics, and the released code would support reproducibility. The design is simple and the ablations cover the main modules. However, the central mechanistic claim that SCPEM extracts a multi-directional 'surround-convergent' gradient prior is not supported by the paper's own equations, because the orientation channels are mathematically identical up to discretization. The empirical claim is also weakened by a duplicated baseline row, the absence of error bars or significance tests, and an overbroad wording of 'outperforms' given that RPCANet has higher IoU on IRSTD-1K. The contribution is therefore potentially useful but requires substantial correction of the method's interpretation and more careful empirical reporting before the stated claims are justified.

major comments (3)
  1. [III-B2, Eq. (2)] The claim that MGMCB captures multi-directional surround-convergent structure is contradicted by the definition of IM. Expanding Eq. (2), with D_theta I = cos(theta) I_x + sin(theta) I_y and D_{theta+pi/2} I = -sin(theta) I_x + cos(theta) I_y, gives IM = I_x^2 + I_y^2, independent of theta. Thus all 24 orientation channels compute the same gradient-magnitude map up to discretization error, and the squaring discards the sign of the directional derivative, so no information about gradients converging toward the target center is retained. Consequently, CP1 and CP2 are generic edge-strength features, not directional surround-convergent priors, and the ablations in Tables II-IV cannot support the paper's central mechanistic explanation. The authors should either redefine the filters so that channels genuinely encode orientation (e.g., signed directional derivatives) and rerun the experiments, or substantially reframe the contribution as a fixed gradient-magnitude prior and provide evidence for why that prior helps.
  2. [Table I] The IPI row for IRSTD-1K exactly duplicates the IPI row for NUDT-SIRST (IoU=27.60, F1=31.82, Pd=72.28, Fa=37.28), which is almost certainly a copy-paste error and must be corrected. More generally, the quantitative comparison reports no error bars, confidence intervals, or significance tests; on test sets of only 201-664 images, differences of a few percentage points (e.g., Pd 93.27 vs 92.93 for IRSTD-1K) could be within run-to-run variability. In addition, the design hyperparameters (kernel scales 3, 5, 7, the 24-orientation choice, embedding positions, and channel reduction rate r) are selected on the same benchmarks used for the final numbers, with no held-out validation, so the reported margins are optimistically biased.
  3. [Abstract and Section IV-C] The abstract's statement that CSPENet 'outperforms other state-of-the-art methods' is too strong: on IRSTD-1K, RPCANet achieves a higher IoU (66.93 vs 66.79), and on NUAA-SIRST, RPCANet also has a higher IoU (74.21 vs 73.48) and F1 (86.51 vs 87.41? actually F1 is lower for Ours? Let me re-read: Table I shows Ours IoU=79.83, F1=87.41, Pd=96.96, Fa=15.18 on NUAA-SIRST; RPCANet IoU=74.21, F1=86.51, Pd=95.62, Fa=47.21. So RPCANet is not higher on that row; I need to be precise. The correct statement is that RPCANet has higher IoU on IRSTD-1K only. I should correct this comment accordingly.) Let me replace with: 'On IRSTD-1K, RPCANet has a higher IoU (66.93 vs 66.79), so the claim of universal outperformance is not accurate. Similarly, Table III shows that adding CP2 alone can reduce IoU relative to the backbone on IRSTD-1K (64.39 vs 65.20) and NUAA-SIRST (73.16 vs 73.48), so the 'collaborative' benefit of the two priors is not uniformly positive. The claims should be qualified to reflect which metrics and datasets are won.'
minor comments (4)
  1. [III-B2, Eq. (3)] Equation (3) uses the same notation DWConv for both complementary depth-wise convolutions, making the 90-degree rotation invisible in the formula; distinguish the two operators and state the rotation explicitly.
  2. [Tables II, IV, V] Several table headers denote Fa with an up arrow (e.g., 'Fa↑' in Tables II, IV, and V), although lower Fa is better; these arrows should be corrected to down arrows to avoid confusion.
  3. [III-B1, Fig. 2] The motivating observation that target contours exhibit surround-convergent gradients is supported only by a qualitative 3D visualization. A quantitative statistic over the training datasets (e.g., histogram of gradient directions inside target masks versus background) would strengthen the premise and would also help the reader judge whether the proposed prior is really specific to small infrared targets.
  4. [References] Reference [1], cited in the introduction for the importance of infrared imaging, appears to be a paper-spray mass spectrometry article and is likely irrelevant; please verify the citation.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The empirical benchmark claim is independent, but the claimed multi-directional surround-convergent prior reduces by construction to ordinary gradient magnitude via Eq. (2), so the mechanistic explanation is a renaming of a known result.

  1. renaming known result [Section III-B2 (MGMCB), Eqs. (1)-(2), pages 4-5]
    "GD(x,y,sigma_G,theta_G)=-(G(x,y,sigma_G)/sigma_G^2)(x cos theta_G + y sin theta_G) (1) ... I_M(x,y,sigma_G,theta_G)=(GD(x,y,sigma_G,theta_G)⊗I_in(x,y))^2 + (GD(x,y,sigma_G,theta_G+pi/2)⊗I_in(x,y))^2 (2) ... we construct the MGMCB output by stacking gradient magnitude feature maps from 24 discrete orientations [0°, 15°, 30°, ..., 345°]."

    With Eq. (1), the oriented convolution response is D_theta I = cos(theta) I_x + sin(theta) I_y and D_{theta+pi/2} I = -sin(theta) I_x + cos(theta) I_y. Substituting into Eq. (2) gives (cos(theta) I_x + sin(theta) I_y)^2 + (-sin(theta) I_x + cos(theta) I_y)^2 = I_x^2 + I_y^2, which is independent of theta. Therefore the 24 orientation channels of MGMCB are the same scalar gradient-magnitude map up to kernel discretization, and the squaring removes the sign of the directional derivative, so no information about gradients converging toward a target center is retained.

full rationale

The paper's headline result—higher Pd/IoU/F1 than published baselines on NUDT-SIRST, IRSTD-1K, and NUAA-SIRST—is an external benchmark comparison; these numbers are not derived from the SCPEM equations, so the core empirical claim is not circular. The load-bearing mechanistic claim, however, is: SCPEM is said to extract 'multi-directional surround-convergent' gradient structure, but Eq. (2) combines each oriented Gaussian-derivative response with its orthogonal counterpart by squaring, which by the identity (a cos(theta)+b sin(theta))^2 + (-a sin(theta)+b cos(theta))^2 = a^2 + b^2 makes the result independent of theta. All 24 orientation channels are the same gradient-magnitude map up to discretization, and the squaring destroys the sign that would indicate convergence toward a center. Thus CP1 and CP2 are the classical gradient-magnitude operator relabeled as a multi-orientation structural prior; the ablation gains cannot be attributed to multi-directional surround-convergence. This is a renaming of a known result rather than a fitted-input circularity: no fitted parameter is disguised as a prediction, and no load-bearing argument rests on self-citation. Separate issues—Table I showing identical IPI rows on two datasets, no error bars, and the selected kernel scales/orientations being validated on the same benchmarks—are correctness and reproducibility concerns, not circularity. The conclusion honestly limits validation to one backbone, which also does not create circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on hand-chosen design parameters (gradient kernel scales, orientation count, embedding positions) and on untested assumptions about the benchmark protocols and the universality of the surround-convergent prior. No invented physical entities or ad hoc mathematical objects are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • Gaussian derivative scale sigma_G = not reported (three kernel sizes 3, 5, 7)
    The scale of the Gaussian derivative kernels in SCPEM is chosen by hand; no search or sensitivity analysis is reported.
  • Orientation count = 24 (0 to 345 degrees)
    The number of discrete gradient orientations is fixed to 24 without ablation.
  • MGMCB kernel sizes = 3, 5, 7
    Three scales are selected without sensitivity analysis.
  • Channel reduction rate r in CHKIM = not reported
    The reduction rate in the top-down attention module is a hyperparameter not justified or ablated.
  • Network embedding positions for CP1 and CP2 = input concatenation for CP1, each decoder level for CP2
    The positions are selected based on the authors' design intuition; no search over alternative positions is reported.
  • Loss function = not specified
    The training loss is never stated in the paper, which is a core reproducibility gap.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The three public datasets are used with the standard train/test splits as originally provided.
    The paper relies on the dataset splits being correct and consistent with prior work, but does not state the split details or preprocessing.
  • domain assumption The reported baseline numbers are taken from their original papers or reproduction runs and are comparable under identical protocols.
    Table I mixes numbers from different sources without stating whether they were rerun under the same settings.
  • domain assumption Gradient directions of target contour pixels converge toward the target center in typical infrared small target imagery.
    This motivates SCPEM, but the paper gives only qualitative visual evidence (Fig. 2), not a quantitative verification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of CSPENet: Contour-Aware and Saliency Priors Embedding Network for Infrared Small Target Detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L6XDHRQG

@misc{pith2026250509943,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: CSPENet: Contour-Aware and Saliency Priors Embedding Network for Infrared Small Target Detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L6XDHRQG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.09943}
}
read the original abstract

Infrared small target detection (ISTD) plays a critical role in a wide range of civilian and military applications. Existing methods suffer from deficiencies in the localization of dim targets and the perception of contour information under dense clutter environments, severely limiting their detection performance. To tackle these issues, we propose a contour-aware and saliency priors embedding network (CSPENet) for ISTD. We first design a surround-convergent prior extraction module (SCPEM) that effectively captures the intrinsic characteristic of target contour pixel gradients converging toward their center. This module concurrently extracts two collaborative priors: a boosted saliency prior for accurate target localization and multi-scale structural priors for comprehensively enriching contour detail representation. Building upon this, we propose a dual-branch priors embedding architecture (DBPEA) that establishes differentiated feature fusion pathways, embedding these two priors at optimal network positions to achieve performance enhancement. Finally, we develop an attention-guided feature enhancement module (AGFEM) to refine feature representations and improve saliency estimation accuracy. Experimental results on public datasets NUDT-SIRST, IRSTD-1k, and NUAA-SIRST demonstrate that our CSPENet outperforms other state-of-the-art methods in detection performance. The code is available at https://github.com/IDIP2025/CSPENet.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.09943 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Visual comparison. Segmentation results of complex￾structured targets (zoomed) in dense clutter environment obtained by different methods. a poor SNR. 3) Shape variation: Unstructured geometries resulting from variations in imaging distance, target motion, and environmental factors lead to significant changes in target appearance [81]. These problems have rendered ISTD a persis￾tent research challenge, prompting ext… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Specifically, the radiation intensity in the central region is higher than that in the surrounding edge regions, and the gradient directions of most edge pixels converge toward the target center. Leveraging this structural characteristic, we can coarsely localize dim targets, thereby effectively suppressing false alarms in complex scenes. Furthermore, the surround￾contour structural priors enable finer-grained repre… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The overall architecture of the proposed CSPENet for infrared small target detection. 1) SCPEM: The input image is first fed into SCPEM to obtain two types of CP components. 2) DBPEA: The two types of CP components are embedded into the deep learning network through DBPEA, where CP1 is jointly encoded with the input image via channel concatenation, and CP2 dynamically interacts with the corresponding deep semantic f… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The architecture of MGMCB. [0°, 15°, 30°, ..., 345°]. For neural network implementation, we reformulate this process using depth-wise convolutions to obtain the gradient magnitude tensor Fe(Iin, k): Fe(Iin, k) = DWConv(Iin, k) 2 + DWConv (Iin, k) 2 (3) where both DWCon…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustration of modulation modules. (a) Top-down global attentional modulation, (b) Bottom-up point-wise attentional modu￾lation, (c) Framework diagram of the proposed CHKIM. (both with C channels and spatial dimensions W × H), the modulation process is expressed as: X…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The architecture of AGFEM [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: ROC curves of different algorithms. (a) ROC curve of different algorithms on NUDT-SIRST. (b) ROC curve of different algorithms on IRSTD-1K. (c) ROC curve of different algorithms on NUAA-SIRST. with especially pronounced advantages on IRSTD-1K and NUAA-SIRST, where it o…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Visual examples of different methods on three different datasets, with yellow circles indicating false positives and green boxes indicating missed detections. The detected target areas are highlighted in red and enlarged, placed in the corners of the detection image. T…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Visual examples of embedding different prior knowledge into the backbone on three different datasets, with yellow circles indicating false positives. The detected target areas are highlighted in red and enlarged, placed in the corners of the detection image [PITH_FULL…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Heatmap and description of detection results for an image with severe background clutter interference. The first to fourth rows of pictures represent backbone, backbone+CP1 , backbone+CP2 and backbone+DBPEA, respectively. TABLE III: IoU (%), F1 (%), Pd (%), AND Fa [P…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Heatmap and description of detection results for an image containing an irregularly shaped target. The first to fourth rows of pictures represent backbone, backbone+CP1 , backbone+CP2 and backbone+DBPEA respectively. (a) Local (b) BiLocal (c) BiGlobal [PITH_FULL_IMAG…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Architectures for the ablation study on CHKIM. (a) Top-down modulation with point-wise channel attention module (Local). (b) Bi-directional modulation with point-wise channel attention module (BiLocal). (c) Bi-directional modulation with global channel attention modul…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Internal standard utilization strategies for quantitative paper spray mass spectrometry

    Lucas R Abruzzi, John-Clare Laxton, Taelor M Zarkovic, and Chris G Gill. Internal standard utilization strategies for quantitative paper spray mass spectrometry. Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, 2025

    2025

  2. [3]

    Local convergence index-based infrared small target detection against complex scenes

    Siying Cao, Jiakun Deng, Junhai Luo, Zhi Li, Junsong Hu, and Zhenming Peng. Local convergence index-based infrared small target detection against complex scenes. Remote Sensing, 15(5):1464, 2023

    2023

  3. [2]

    Infrared small target enhancement and detection based on modified top-hat transformations

    Xiangzhi Bai and Fugen Zhou. Infrared small target enhancement and detection based on modified top-hat transformations. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 36(6):1193–1201, 2010

    2010

  4. [4]

    A local contrast method for small infrared target detection

    CL Philip Chen, Hong Li, Yantao Wei, Tian Xia, and Yuan Yan Tang. A local contrast method for small infrared target detection. IEEE transactions on geoscience and remote sensing, 52(1):574–581, 2013

    2013

  5. [5]

    Target detection in remote sensing image based on object-and-scene context constrained cnn

    Bei Cheng, Zhengzhou Li, Bitong Xu, Chujia Dang, and Jiaqi Deng. Target detection in remote sensing image based on object-and-scene context constrained cnn. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 19:1–5, 2021

    2021

  6. [6]

    Lightweight infrared small target detection network using full-scale skip connection u-net

    Won Young Chung, In Ho Lee, and Chan Gook Park. Lightweight infrared small target detection network using full-scale skip connection u-net. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 20:1–5, 2023

    2023

  7. [7]

    Reweighted infrared patch-tensor model with both nonlocal and local priors for single-frame small target detec- JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL

    Yimian Dai and Yiquan Wu. Reweighted infrared patch-tensor model with both nonlocal and local priors for single-frame small target detec- JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, APRIL 2025 13 tion. IEEE journal of selected topics in applied earth observations and remote sensing, 10(8):3752–3767, 2017

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    Asymmetric contextual modulation for infrared small target detection

    Yimian Dai, Yiquan Wu, Fei Zhou, and Kobus Barnard. Asymmetric contextual modulation for infrared small target detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, pages 950–959, 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 86 references
  1. [9]

    Attentional local contrast networks for infrared small target detection

    Yimian Dai, Yiquan Wu, Fei Zhou, and Kobus Barnard. Attentional local contrast networks for infrared small target detection. IEEE transactions on geoscience and remote sensing, 59(11):9813–9824, 2021

    2021

  2. [10]

    Max-mean and max-median filters for detection of small targets

    Suyog D Deshpande, Meng Hwa Er, Ronda Venkateswarlu, and Philip Chan. Max-mean and max-median filters for detection of small targets. In Signal and Data Processing of Small Targets 1999, volume 3809, pages 74–83. SPIE, 1999

    1999

  3. [11]

    Infrared small target detection based on region proposal and cnn classifier

    Mingming Fan, Shaoqing Tian, Kai Liu, Jiaxin Zhao, and Yunsong Li. Infrared small target detection based on region proposal and cnn classifier. Signal, Image and Video Processing, 15(8):1927–1936, 2021

    1927

  4. [12]

    Object detection meets knowledge graphs

    Yuan Fang, Kingsley Kuan, Jie Lin, Cheston Tan, and Vijay Chan- drasekhar. Object detection meets knowledge graphs. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence, 2017

    2017

  5. [13]

    Infrared patch-image model for small tar- get detection in a single image

    Chenqiang Gao, Deyu Meng, Yi Yang, Yongtao Wang, Xiaofang Zhou, and Alexander G Hauptmann. Infrared patch-image model for small tar- get detection in a single image. IEEE transactions on image processing, 22(12):4996–5009, 2013

    2013

  6. [14]

    Infrared small target detection utilizing the multiscale relative local contrast measure

    Jinhui Han, Kun Liang, Bo Zhou, Xinying Zhu, Jie Zhao, and Linlin Zhao. Infrared small target detection utilizing the multiscale relative local contrast measure. IEEE geoscience and remote sensing letters, 15(4):612–616, 2018

    2018

  7. [15]

    A local contrast method for infrared small-target detection utilizing a tri-layer window

    Jinhui Han, Saed Moradi, Iman Faramarzi, Chengyin Liu, Honghui Zhang, and Qian Zhao. A local contrast method for infrared small-target detection utilizing a tri-layer window. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 17(10):1822–1826, 2019

    2019

  8. [16]

    Infrared small target detection based on the weighted strengthened local contrast measure

    Jinhui Han, Saed Moradi, Iman Faramarzi, Honghui Zhang, Qian Zhao, Xiaojian Zhang, and Nan Li. Infrared small target detection based on the weighted strengthened local contrast measure. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 18(9):1670–1674, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Ristdnet: Robust infrared small target detection network

    Qingyu Hou, Zhipeng Wang, Fanjiao Tan, Ye Zhao, Haoliang Zheng, and Wei Zhang. Ristdnet: Robust infrared small target detection network. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 19:1–5, 2021

    2021

  10. [18]

    Datransnet: dynamic attention trans- former network for infrared small target detection

    Chen Hu, Yian Huang, Kexuan Li, Luping Zhang, Chang Long, Yiming Zhu, Tian Pu, and Zhenming Peng. Datransnet: dynamic attention trans- former network for infrared small target detection. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Squeeze-and-excitation networks

    Jie Hu, Li Shen, and Gang Sun. Squeeze-and-excitation networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 7132–7141, 2018

    2018

  12. [20]

    Batch normalization: Acceler- ating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift

    Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy. Batch normalization: Acceler- ating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. In International conference on machine learning, pages 448–456. pmlr, 2015

    2015

  13. [21]

    Hybrid knowledge routed modules for large-scale object detection

    Chenhan Jiang, Hang Xu, Xiaodan Liang, and Liang Lin. Hybrid knowledge routed modules for large-scale object detection. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 31, 2018

    2018

  14. [22]

    Small target detection utilizing robust methods of the human visual system for irst

    Sungho Kim, Yukyung Yang, Joohyoung Lee, and Yongchan Park. Small target detection utilizing robust methods of the human visual system for irst. Journal of infrared, millimeter, and terahertz waves, 30:994–1011, 2009

    2009

  15. [23]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization

    Diederik P Kingma. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Infrared small target detection via nonconvex tensor fibered rank approximation

    Xuan Kong, Chunping Yang, Siying Cao, Chaohai Li, and Zhenming Peng. Infrared small target detection via nonconvex tensor fibered rank approximation. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60:1–21, 2021

    2021

  17. [25]

    Infrared small target tracking algorithm via segmentation network and multistrategy fusion

    Renke Kou, Chunping Wang, Ying Yu, Zhenming Peng, Fuyu Huang, and Qiang Fu. Infrared small target tracking algorithm via segmentation network and multistrategy fusion. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–12, 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    Dense nested attention network for infrared small target detection

    Boyang Li, Chao Xiao, Longguang Wang, Yingqian Wang, Zaiping Lin, Miao Li, Wei An, and Yulan Guo. Dense nested attention network for infrared small target detection. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 32:1745–1758, 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    Pyra- mid attention network for semantic segmentation

    Hanchao Li, Pengfei Xiong, Jie An, and Lingxue Wang. Pyra- mid attention network for semantic segmentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10180, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Fd2-net: Frequency-driven feature decom- position network for infrared-visible object detection

    Ke Li, Di Wang, Zhangyuan Hu, Shaofeng Li, Weiping Ni, Lin Zhao, and Quan Wang. Fd2-net: Frequency-driven feature decom- position network for infrared-visible object detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.09258, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Network in network

    Min Lin, Qiang Chen, and Shuicheng Yan. Network in network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.4400, 2013

    2013 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Image enhancement- based detection with small infrared targets

    Shuai Liu, Pengfei Chen, and Marcin Wo ´zniak. Image enhancement- based detection with small infrared targets. Remote Sensing, 14(13):3232, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Dmef-net: Lightweight infrared dim small target detection network for limited samples

    Tianlei Ma, Zhen Yang, Yi-Fan Song, Jing Liang, and Heshan Wang. Dmef-net: Lightweight infrared dim small target detection network for limited samples. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–15, 2023

    2023

  24. [32]

    A novel transformer-based object detection method with geometric and object co-occurrence prior knowledge for remote sensing images

    Nan Mo and Ruixi Zhu. A novel transformer-based object detection method with geometric and object co-occurrence prior knowledge for remote sensing images. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Fast and robust small infrared target detection using absolute directional mean difference algorithm

    Saed Moradi, Payman Moallem, and Mohamad Farzan Sabahi. Fast and robust small infrared target detection using absolute directional mean difference algorithm. Signal Processing, 177:107727, 2020

    2020

  26. [34]

    Rectified linear units improve restricted boltzmann machines

    Vinod Nair and Geoffrey E Hinton. Rectified linear units improve restricted boltzmann machines. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on machine learning (ICML-10), pages 807–814, 2010

    2010

  27. [35]

    An infrared small target detection method based on multiscale local homogeneity measure

    Jinyan Nie, Shaocheng Qu, Yantao Wei, Liming Zhang, and Lizhen Deng. An infrared small target detection method based on multiscale local homogeneity measure. Infrared Physics & Technology, 90:186– 194, 2018

    2018

  28. [36]

    Ftc-net: Fusion of transformer and cnn features for infrared small target detection

    Meibin Qi, Liu Liu, Shuo Zhuang, Yimin Liu, Kunyuan Li, Yanfang Yang, and Xiaohong Li. Ftc-net: Fusion of transformer and cnn features for infrared small target detection. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 15:8613–8623, 2022

    2022

  29. [37]

    Msffnet: A multi-level sparse feature fusion network for infrared dim small target detection

    Xiangyang Ren, Boyang Jiao, Zhenming Peng, Renke Kou, Peng Wang, and Mingyuan Li. Msffnet: A multi-level sparse feature fusion network for infrared dim small target detection. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    High-boost-based multiscale local contrast measure for infrared small target detection

    Yafei Shi, Yantao Wei, Huang Yao, Donghui Pan, and Guangrun Xiao. High-boost-based multiscale local contrast measure for infrared small target detection. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 15(1):33–37, 2017

    2017

  31. [39]

    Performance evaluation of 2-d adaptive prediction filters for detection of small objects in image data

    Tarun Soni, James R Zeidler, and Walter H Ku. Performance evaluation of 2-d adaptive prediction filters for detection of small objects in image data. IEEE Transactions on Image processing, 2(3):327–340, 1993

    1993

  32. [40]

    Receptive- field and direction induced attention network for infrared dim small target detection with a large-scale dataset irdst

    Heng Sun, Junxiang Bai, Fan Yang, and Xiangzhi Bai. Receptive- field and direction induced attention network for infrared dim small target detection with a large-scale dataset irdst. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–13, 2023

    2023

  33. [41]

    The information bottleneck method

    Naftali Tishby, Fernando C Pereira, and William Bialek. The information bottleneck method. arXiv preprint physics/0004057, 2000

    2000 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Residual attention network for image classification

    Fei Wang, Mengqing Jiang, Chen Qian, Shuo Yang, Cheng Li, Honggang Zhang, Xiaogang Wang, and Xiaoou Tang. Residual attention network for image classification. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3156–3164, 2017

    2017

  35. [43]

    Miss detection vs

    Huan Wang, Luping Zhou, and Lei Wang. Miss detection vs. false alarm: Adversarial learning for small object segmentation in infrared images. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 8509–8518, 2019

    2019

  36. [44]

    Carafe: Content-aware reassembly of features

    Jiaqi Wang, Kai Chen, Rui Xu, Ziwei Liu, Chen Change Loy, and Dahua Lin. Carafe: Content-aware reassembly of features. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 3007– 3016, 2019

    2019

  37. [45]

    Interior attention-aware network for infrared small target detection

    Kewei Wang, Shuaiyuan Du, Chengxin Liu, and Zhiguo Cao. Interior attention-aware network for infrared small target detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60:1–13, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    Paying more attention to local contrast: Improv- ing infrared small target detection performance via prior knowledge

    Peichao Wang, Jiabao Wang, Yao Chen, Rui Zhang, Yang Li, and Zhuang Miao. Paying more attention to local contrast: Improv- ing infrared small target detection performance via prior knowledge. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 146:110244, 2025

    2025

  39. [47]

    Knowledge graph embedding: A survey of approaches and applications

    Quan Wang, Zhendong Mao, Bin Wang, and Li Guo. Knowledge graph embedding: A survey of approaches and applications. IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering, 29(12):2724–2743, 2017

    2017

  40. [48]

    Multiscale feature extraction u-net for infrared dim-and small-target detection

    Xiaozhen Wang, Chengshan Han, Jiaqi Li, Ting Nie, Mingxuan Li, Xiaofeng Wang, and Liang Huang. Multiscale feature extraction u-net for infrared dim-and small-target detection. Remote Sensing, 16(4):643, 2024

    2024

  41. [49]

    Infrared dim target detection based on visual attention

    Xin Wang, Guofang Lv, and Lizhong Xu. Infrared dim target detection based on visual attention. Infrared Physics & Technology, 55(6):513– 521, 2012

    2012

  42. [50]

    Multiscale patch-based contrast measure for small infrared target detection

    Yantao Wei, Xinge You, and Hong Li. Multiscale patch-based contrast measure for small infrared target detection. Pattern Recognition, 58:216– 226, 2016. JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, APRIL 2025 14

    2016

  43. [51]

    Infrared small target detection using spatiotemporal 4-d tensor train and ring unfolding

    Fengyi Wu, Hang Yu, Anran Liu, Junhai Luo, and Zhenming Peng. Infrared small target detection using spatiotemporal 4-d tensor train and ring unfolding. IEEE transactions on geoscience and remote sensing, 61:1–22, 2023

    2023

  44. [52]

    Rpcanet: Deep unfolding rpca based infrared small target detection

    Fengyi Wu, Tianfang Zhang, Lei Li, Yian Huang, and Zhenming Peng. Rpcanet: Deep unfolding rpca based infrared small target detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pages 4809–4818, 2024

    2024

  45. [53]

    Infrared small target detection with swin transformer-based multi- scale atrous spatial pyramid pooling network

    Heng Wu, Xi Huang, Chunhua He, Huapan Xiao, and Shaojuan Luo. Infrared small target detection with swin transformer-based multi- scale atrous spatial pyramid pooling network. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 2024

    2024

  46. [54]

    Self-mimic learning for small-scale pedestrian detection

    Jialian Wu, Chunluan Zhou, Qian Zhang, Ming Yang, and Junsong Yuan. Self-mimic learning for small-scale pedestrian detection. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages 2012– 2020, 2020

    2012

  47. [55]

    A double- neighborhood gradient method for infrared small target detection

    Lang Wu, Yong Ma, Fan Fan, Minghui Wu, and Jun Huang. A double- neighborhood gradient method for infrared small target detection. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 18(8):1476–1480, 2020

    2020

  48. [56]

    Repisd-net: Learning efficient infrared small-target detection network via structural re-parameterization

    Shuanglin Wu, Chao Xiao, Longguang Wang, Yingqian Wang, Jungang Yang, and Wei An. Repisd-net: Learning efficient infrared small-target detection network via structural re-parameterization. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–12, 2023

    2023

  49. [57]

    Mtu-net: Multilevel transunet for space-based infrared tiny ship detection

    Tianhao Wu, Boyang Li, Yihang Luo, Yingqian Wang, Chao Xiao, Ting Liu, Jungang Yang, Wei An, and Yulan Guo. Mtu-net: Multilevel transunet for space-based infrared tiny ship detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–15, 2023

    2023

  50. [58]

    Uiu-net: U-net in u- net for infrared small object detection

    Xin Wu, Danfeng Hong, and Jocelyn Chanussot. Uiu-net: U-net in u- net for infrared small object detection. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 32:364–376, 2022

    2022

  51. [59]

    Spatial- aware graph relation network for large-scale object detection

    Hang Xu, Chenhan Jiang, Xiaodan Liang, and Zhenguo Li. Spatial- aware graph relation network for large-scale object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 9298–9307, 2019

    2019

  52. [60]

    Reasoning-rcnn: Unifying adaptive global reasoning into large- scale object detection

    Hang Xu, ChenHan Jiang, Xiaodan Liang, Liang Lin, and Zhenguo Li. Reasoning-rcnn: Unifying adaptive global reasoning into large- scale object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 6419–6428, 2019

    2019

  53. [61]

    Hcf-net: Hierarchi- cal context fusion network for infrared small object detection

    Shibiao Xu, Shuchen Zheng, Wenhao Xu, Rongtao Xu, Changwei Wang, Jiguang Zhang, Xiaoqiang Teng, Ao Li, and Li Guo. Hcf-net: Hierarchi- cal context fusion network for infrared small object detection. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME), pages 1–6...

    2024

  54. [62]

    Infrared small target detection based on local contrast- weighted multidirectional derivative

    Yunkai Xu, Minjie Wan, Xiaojie Zhang, Jian Wu, Yili Chen, Qian Chen, and Guohua Gu. Infrared small target detection based on local contrast- weighted multidirectional derivative. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–16, 2023

    2023

  55. [63]

    Label evolution based on local contrast measure for single-point supervised infrared small target detection

    Dongning Yang, Haopeng Zhang, Ying Li, and Zhiguo Jiang. Label evolution based on local contrast measure for single-point supervised infrared small target detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  56. [64]

    Prior knowledge guided small object detection on high-resolution images

    Zixuan Yang, Xiujuan Chai, Ruiping Wang, Weijun Guo, Weixuan Wang, Li Pu, and Xilin Chen. Prior knowledge guided small object detection on high-resolution images. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pages 86–90. IEEE, 2019

    2019

  57. [65]

    Spatial-temporal tensor ring norm regularization for infrared small target detection

    Haiyang Yi, Chunping Yang, Ruochen Qie, Jingwen Liao, Fengyi Wu, Tian Pu, and Zhenming Peng. Spatial-temporal tensor ring norm regularization for infrared small target detection. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 20:1–5, 2023

    2023

  58. [66]

    Mapping degeneration meets label evolution: Learning infrared small target detection with single point supervision

    Xinyi Ying, Li Liu, Yingqian Wang, Ruojing Li, Nuo Chen, Zaiping Lin, Weidong Sheng, and Shilin Zhou. Mapping degeneration meets label evolution: Learning infrared small target detection with single point supervision. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Visio...

    2023

  59. [67]

    Local motion and contrast priors driven deep network for infrared small target superresolution

    Xinyi Ying, Yingqian Wang, Longguang Wang, Weidong Sheng, Li Liu, Zaiping Lin, and Shilin Zhou. Local motion and contrast priors driven deep network for infrared small target superresolution. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 15:...

    2022

  60. [68]

    Infrared small target detection based on multiscale local contrast learning networks

    Chuang Yu, Yunpeng Liu, Shuhang Wu, Zhuhua Hu, Xin Xia, Deyan Lan, and Xin Liu. Infrared small target detection based on multiscale local contrast learning networks. Infrared Physics & Technology, 123:104107, 2022

    2022

  61. [69]

    Searching central difference convolutional networks for face anti-spoofing

    Zitong Yu, Chenxu Zhao, Zezheng Wang, Yunxiao Qin, Zhuo Su, Xiaobai Li, Feng Zhou, and Guoying Zhao. Searching central difference convolutional networks for face anti-spoofing. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 5295–5305, 2020

    2020

  62. [70]

    Sctransnet: Spatial-channel cross transformer network for infrared small target detection

    Shuai Yuan, Hanlin Qin, Xiang Yan, Naveed Akhtar, and Ajmal Mian. Sctransnet: Spatial-channel cross transformer network for infrared small target detection. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  63. [71]

    Dcanet: Dense convolutional attention network for infrared small target detec- tion

    Dongyuan Zang, Weihua Su, Bonan Zhang, and Huixin Liu. Dcanet: Dense convolutional attention network for infrared small target detec- tion. Measurement, 240:115595, 2025

    2025

  64. [72]

    Infrared small target detection based on partial sum of the tensor nuclear norm

    Landan Zhang and Zhenming Peng. Infrared small target detection based on partial sum of the tensor nuclear norm. Remote Sensing, 11(4):382, 2019

    2019

  65. [73]

    Mdigcnet: Multi-directional information-guided contextual network for infrared small target detection

    Luping Zhang, Junhai Luo, Yian Huang, Fengyi Wu, Xingye Cui, and Zhenming Peng. Mdigcnet: Multi-directional information-guided contextual network for infrared small target detection. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  66. [74]

    Mir- sam: multimodal vision-language segment anything model for infrared small target detection

    Mingjin Zhang, Qian Xu, Yuchun Wang, Xi Li, and Haojuan Yuan. Mir- sam: multimodal vision-language segment anything model for infrared small target detection. Visual Intelligence, 3(1):1–13, 2025

    2025

  67. [75]

    Isnet: Shape matters for infrared small target detection

    Mingjin Zhang, Rui Zhang, Yuxiang Yang, Haichen Bai, Jing Zhang, and Jie Guo. Isnet: Shape matters for infrared small target detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 877–886, 2022

    2022

  68. [76]

    Agpcnet: Attention-guided pyramid context networks for infrared small target detection

    Tianfang Zhang, Siying Cao, Tian Pu, and Zhenming Peng. Agpcnet: Attention-guided pyramid context networks for infrared small target detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.03580, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Attention-guided pyramid context networks for detecting infrared small target under complex background

    Tianfang Zhang, Lei Li, Siying Cao, Tian Pu, and Zhenming Peng. Attention-guided pyramid context networks for detecting infrared small target under complex background. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 59(4):4250–4261, 2023

    2023

  70. [78]

    Controllable generative knowledge driven few-shot object detection from optical remote sensing imagery

    Tong Zhang, Yin Zhuang, Guanqun Wang, He Chen, Hao Wang, Lianlin Li, and Jun Li. Controllable generative knowledge driven few-shot object detection from optical remote sensing imagery. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2025

    2025

  71. [79]

    Infrared small target detection based on gradient correlation filtering and contrast measurement

    Xiangyue Zhang, Jingyu Ru, and Chengdong Wu. Infrared small target detection based on gradient correlation filtering and contrast measurement. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 61:1–12, 2023

    2023

  72. [80]

    Infrared small target detection based on interpretation weighted sparse method

    Yuting Zhang, Zhengzhou Li, Abubakar Siddique, Abdullah Azeem, Wenhao Chen, and Dong Cao. Infrared small target detection based on interpretation weighted sparse method. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2025

    2025

  73. [81]

    Istd-cracknet: Hybrid cnn- transformer models focusing on fine-grained segmentation of multi-scale pavement cracks

    Zaiyan Zhang, Yangyang Zhuang, Weidong Song, Jiachen Wu, Xin Ye, Hongyue Zhang, Yanli Xu, and Guoli Shi. Istd-cracknet: Hybrid cnn- transformer models focusing on fine-grained segmentation of multi-scale pavement cracks. Measurement, page 117215, 2025

    2025

  74. [82]

    Multi-scale direction-aware network for infrared small target detection

    Jinmiao Zhao, Zelin Shi, Chuang Yu, and Yunpeng Liu. Multi-scale direction-aware network for infrared small target detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02037, 2024

    2024

  75. [83]

    Tbc-net: A real-time detector for infrared small target detection using semantic constraint

    Mingxin Zhao, Li Cheng, Xu Yang, Peng Feng, Liyuan Liu, and Nanjian Wu. Tbc-net: A real-time detector for infrared small target detection using semantic constraint. arXiv preprint arXiv:2001.05852, 2019

    2001 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Research on high robust infrared small target detection method in complex background

    Dali Zhou and Xiaodong Wang. Research on high robust infrared small target detection method in complex background. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 20:1–5, 2023

    2023

  77. [85]

    Towards accurate infrared small target detection via edge-aware gated transformer

    Yiming Zhu, Yong Ma, Fan Fan, Jun Huang, Kangle Wu, and Ge Wang. Towards accurate infrared small target detection via edge-aware gated transformer. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 2024. Jiakun Dengreceived the M.S. degree in Op...

    2024

  78. [2023]

    de- gree in information and communication engineerng with the School of Information and Communication Engineering, UESTC, Chengdu, China

    He is currently working toward the M.E. de- gree in information and communication engineerng with the School of Information and Communication Engineering, UESTC, Chengdu, China. His research interests include image processing, computer vision, and infrared small target detecti...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.