Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Text is Text, No Matter What: Unifying Text Recognition using Knowledge Distillation

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 2107.12087 v2 pith:YMBXOSGJ submitted 2021-07-26 cs.CV

classification cs.CV
keywords textrecognitiondistillationmodelsfirstframeworkhoweverknowledge
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Text recognition remains a fundamental and extensively researched topic in computer vision, largely owing to its wide array of commercial applications. The challenging nature of the very problem however dictated a fragmentation of research efforts: Scene Text Recognition (STR) that deals with text in everyday scenes, and Handwriting Text Recognition (HTR) that tackles hand-written text. In this paper, for the first time, we argue for their unification -- we aim for a single model that can compete favourably with two separate state-of-the-art STR and HTR models. We first show that cross-utilisation of STR and HTR models trigger significant performance drops due to differences in their inherent challenges. We then tackle their union by introducing a knowledge distillation (KD) based framework. This is however non-trivial, largely due to the variable-length and sequential nature of text sequences, which renders off-the-shelf KD techniques that mostly works with global fixed-length data inadequate. For that, we propose three distillation losses all of which are specifically designed to cope with the aforementioned unique characteristics of text recognition. Empirical evidence suggests that our proposed unified model performs on par with individual models, even surpassing them in certain cases. Ablative studies demonstrate that naive baselines such as a two-stage framework, and domain adaption/generalisation alternatives do not work as well, further verifying the appropriateness of our design.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools