Pith. sign in

REVIEW

UCC: Uncertainty guided Cross-head Co-training for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentation

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2205.10334 v2 pith:S635JXEH submitted 2022-05-20 cs.CV

UCC: Uncertainty guided Cross-head Co-training for Semi-Supervised Semantic Segmentation

classification cs.CV
keywords segmentationsemanticuncertaintyco-trainingguidedsemi-supervisedcityscapesconsistency
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Deep neural networks (DNNs) have witnessed great successes in semantic segmentation, which requires a large number of labeled data for training. We present a novel learning framework called Uncertainty guided Cross-head Co-training (UCC) for semi-supervised semantic segmentation. Our framework introduces weak and strong augmentations within a shared encoder to achieve co-training, which naturally combines the benefits of consistency and self-training. Every segmentation head interacts with its peers and, the weak augmentation result is used for supervising the strong. The consistency training samples' diversity can be boosted by Dynamic Cross-Set Copy-Paste (DCSCP), which also alleviates the distribution mismatch and class imbalance problems. Moreover, our proposed Uncertainty Guided Re-weight Module (UGRM) enhances the self-training pseudo labels by suppressing the effect of the low-quality pseudo labels from its peer via modeling uncertainty. Extensive experiments on Cityscapes and PASCAL VOC 2012 demonstrate the effectiveness of our UCC. Our approach significantly outperforms other state-of-the-art semi-supervised semantic segmentation methods. It achieves 77.17$\%$, 76.49$\%$ mIoU on Cityscapes and PASCAL VOC 2012 datasets respectively under 1/16 protocols, which are +10.1$\%$, +7.91$\%$ better than the supervised baseline.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.