Adaptive approach to small-object segmentation

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tingzhi Shen ◽  
Lei Wang
2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 707-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinhee Park ◽  
Dokyeong Kwon ◽  
Bo Won Choi ◽  
Ga Young Kim ◽  
Kwang Yong Kim ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Irme Groothuis ◽  
Carole Sudre ◽  
Silvia Ingala ◽  
Josephine Barnes ◽  
Juan Domingo Gispert Lopez ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 555
Author(s):  
Ikhwan Song ◽  
Sungho Kim

Infrared small-object segmentation (ISOS) has a persistent trade-off problem—that is, which came first, recall or precision? Constructing a fine balance between of them is, au fond, of vital importance to obtain the best performance in real applications, such as surveillance, tracking, and many fields related to infrared searching and tracking. F1-score may be a good evaluation metric for this problem. However, since the F1-score only depends upon a specific threshold value, it cannot reflect the user’s requirements according to the various application environment. Therefore, several metrics are commonly used together. Now we introduce F-area, a novel metric for a panoptic evaluation of average precision and F1-score. It can simultaneously consider the performance in terms of real application and the potential capability of a model. Furthermore, we propose a new network, called the Amorphous Variable Inter-located Network (AVILNet), which is of pliable structure based on GridNet, and it is also an ensemble network consisting of the main and its sub-network. Compared with the state-of-the-art ISOS methods, our model achieved an AP of 51.69%, F1-score of 63.03%, and F-area of 32.58% on the International Conference on Computer Vision 2019 ISOS Single dataset by using one generator. In addition, an AP of 53.6%, an F1-score of 60.99%, and F-area of 32.69% by using dual generators, with beating the existing best record (AP, 51.42%; F1-score, 57.04%; and F-area, 29.33%).


2021 ◽  
Vol 423 ◽  
pp. 490-505
Author(s):  
Klaas Dijkstra ◽  
Jaap van de Loosdrecht ◽  
Waatze A. Atsma ◽  
Lambert R.B. Schomaker ◽  
Marco A. Wiering

Author(s):  
Sterling P. Newberry

The beautiful three dimensional representation of small object surfaces by the SEM leads one to search for ways to open up the sample and look inside. Could this be the answer to a better microscopy for gross biological 3-D structure? We know from X-Ray microscope images that Freeze Drying and Critical Point Drying give promise of adequately preserving gross structure. Can we slice such preparations open for SEM inspection? In general these preparations crush more readily than they slice. Russell and Dagihlian got around the problem by “deembedding” a section before imaging. This some what defeats the advantages of direct dry preparation, thus we are reluctant to accept it as the final solution to our problem. Alternatively, consider fig 1 wherein a freeze dried onion root has a window cut in its surface by a micromanipulator during observation in the SEM.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document