REVIEW 2 cited by
Hallucination In Object Detection -- A Study In Visual Part Verification
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
read the original abstract
We show that object detectors can hallucinate and detect missing objects; potentially even accurately localized at their expected, but non-existing, position. This is particularly problematic for applications that rely on visual part verification: detecting if an object part is present or absent. We show how popular object detectors hallucinate objects in a visual part verification task and introduce the first visual part verification dataset: DelftBikes, which has 10,000 bike photographs, with 22 densely annotated parts per image, where some parts may be missing. We explicitly annotated an extra object state label for each part to reflect if a part is missing or intact. We propose to evaluate visual part verification by relying on recall and compare popular object detectors on DelftBikes.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
The 3D Mirage: Probing and Taming 3D Hallucinations
Depth models hallucinate 3D bumps on flat illusion images when context is cropped; the paper adds a benchmark, two scores, and a LoRA fine-tune that reduces the artifact on the same dataset.
-
Data-Efficient Challenges in Visual Inductive Priors: A Retrospective
A retrospective of four data-limited computer vision challenges finds that ensembles and heavy augmentation, not novel inductive priors, drove winning performance.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.