Unified headlines to be in title case and changed open-set to open set
Signed-off-by: Jim Martens <github@2martens.de>
This commit is contained in:
@ -50,9 +50,9 @@ describes tasks where the network is supposed to identify the
|
|||||||
class of any given input. In this thesis, I will focus on
|
class of any given input. In this thesis, I will focus on
|
||||||
classification.
|
classification.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection*{Object detection in open-set conditions}
|
\subsection*{Object Detection in Open Set Conditions}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
More specifically, I will look at object detection in the open-set
|
More specifically, I will look at object detection in the open set
|
||||||
conditions. In non-technical words this effectively describes
|
conditions. In non-technical words this effectively describes
|
||||||
the kind of situation you encounter with CCTV cameras or robots
|
the kind of situation you encounter with CCTV cameras or robots
|
||||||
outside of a laboratory. Both use cameras that record
|
outside of a laboratory. Both use cameras that record
|
||||||
@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ auto-encoder, a novelty score is calculated. A low novelty
|
|||||||
score signals a known object. The opposite is true for a high
|
score signals a known object. The opposite is true for a high
|
||||||
novelty score.
|
novelty score.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsection*{Research question}
|
\subsection*{Research Question}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Given these two approaches to solve the explanation task of above,
|
Given these two approaches to solve the explanation task of above,
|
||||||
it comes down to performance. At the end of the day the best
|
it comes down to performance. At the end of the day the best
|
||||||
@ -131,14 +131,14 @@ being equal. With respect to auto-encoders a recent implementation
|
|||||||
of an adversarial auto-encoder\cite{Pidhorskyi2018} will be used.
|
of an adversarial auto-encoder\cite{Pidhorskyi2018} will be used.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Hypothesis} Novelty detection using auto-encoders
|
\paragraph{Hypothesis} Novelty detection using auto-encoders
|
||||||
delivers similar or better object detection performance under open-set
|
delivers similar or better object detection performance under open set
|
||||||
conditions while being less computationally expensive compared to
|
conditions while being less computationally expensive compared to
|
||||||
dropout sampling.
|
dropout sampling.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Contribution}
|
\paragraph{Contribution}
|
||||||
The contribution of this thesis is a comparison between dropout
|
The contribution of this thesis is a comparison between dropout
|
||||||
sampling and auto-encoding with respect to the overall performance
|
sampling and auto-encoding with respect to the overall performance
|
||||||
of both for object detection in the open-set conditions using
|
of both for object detection in the open set conditions using
|
||||||
the SSD network for object detection and the SceneNet RGB-D data set
|
the SSD network for object detection and the SceneNet RGB-D data set
|
||||||
with MS COCO classes.
|
with MS COCO classes.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ and intractable problem of averaging over all weights in the network
|
|||||||
is replaced with an optimisation task, where the parameters of the
|
is replaced with an optimisation task, where the parameters of the
|
||||||
simple distribution are optimised over\cite{Kendall2017}.
|
simple distribution are optimised over\cite{Kendall2017}.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsubsection*{Dropout variational inference}
|
\subsubsection*{Dropout Variational Inference}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Kendall and Gal\cite{Kendall2017} showed an approximation for
|
Kendall and Gal\cite{Kendall2017} showed an approximation for
|
||||||
classfication and recognition tasks. Dropout variational inference
|
classfication and recognition tasks. Dropout variational inference
|
||||||
@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ With this dropout sampling technique \(n\) model weights
|
|||||||
of the network with respect to the classification is given by
|
of the network with respect to the classification is given by
|
||||||
the entropy \(H(\mathbf{q}) = - \sum_i q_i \cdot \log q_i\).
|
the entropy \(H(\mathbf{q}) = - \sum_i q_i \cdot \log q_i\).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\subsubsection*{Dropout sampling for object detection}
|
\subsubsection*{Dropout Sampling for Object Detection}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Miller et al\cite{Miller2018} apply the dropout sampling to
|
Miller et al\cite{Miller2018} apply the dropout sampling to
|
||||||
object detection. In that case \(\mathbf{W}\) represents the
|
object detection. In that case \(\mathbf{W}\) represents the
|
||||||
@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ distribution means that no class is more likely than another, which
|
|||||||
is a perfect example of maximum uncertainty. Conversely, if
|
is a perfect example of maximum uncertainty. Conversely, if
|
||||||
one class has a very high probability the entropy will be low.
|
one class has a very high probability the entropy will be low.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In open-set conditions it can be expected that falsely generated
|
In open set conditions it can be expected that falsely generated
|
||||||
detections for unknown object classes have a higher label
|
detections for unknown object classes have a higher label
|
||||||
uncertainty. A treshold on the entropy \(H(\mathbf{q}_i)\) can then
|
uncertainty. A treshold on the entropy \(H(\mathbf{q}_i)\) can then
|
||||||
be used to identify and reject these false positive cases.
|
be used to identify and reject these false positive cases.
|
||||||
@ -370,7 +370,7 @@ the one of dropout sampling or if the object detection performance
|
|||||||
is worse.
|
is worse.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\paragraph{Hypothesis} Novelty detection using auto-encoders
|
\paragraph{Hypothesis} Novelty detection using auto-encoders
|
||||||
delivers similar or better object detection performance under open-set
|
delivers similar or better object detection performance under open set
|
||||||
conditions while being less computationally expensive compared to
|
conditions while being less computationally expensive compared to
|
||||||
dropout sampling.\\
|
dropout sampling.\\
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
@ -389,7 +389,7 @@ the thesis:
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
Summarising, the scientific contribution is a comparison between
|
Summarising, the scientific contribution is a comparison between
|
||||||
dropout sampling and GPND with respect to both object detection
|
dropout sampling and GPND with respect to both object detection
|
||||||
performance and computational performance under open-set conditions
|
performance and computational performance under open set conditions
|
||||||
using the SceneNet RGB-D data set with the MS COCO classes as
|
using the SceneNet RGB-D data set with the MS COCO classes as
|
||||||
"known" object classes.
|
"known" object classes.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user