Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 86 references

Dual Mutual Learning Network with Global-local Awareness for RGB-D Salient Object Detection

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Bidirectional attention fusion tops 24 RGB-D saliency models.

desk verdict Solid, reproducible RGB-D SOD paper that overclaims its SOTA margin; the architecture and ablations hold up, but the abstract needs tempering and the baseline comparisons need control. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01648 v1 pith:O6PNMY64 submitted 2025-01-03 cs.CV cs.MM

Kang Yi , Haoran Tang , Yumeng Li , Jing Xu , Jun Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.MM
keywords RGB-Dsalientobjectdetectiondualattentionmechanismcross-modalfusionpositionmutualchannelcascadetransformer-infusedreconstructionPVTv2saliencybenchmarks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that RGB and depth should refine each other mutually during fusion rather than being combined by a fixed, one-way rule. The proposed GL-DMNet fuses the two modalities through a position mutual fusion module and a channel mutual fusion module, then decodes the fused features with a cascade transformer-infused reconstruction network. On six RGB-D salient object detection benchmarks, the paper reports that GL-DMNet outperforms 24 prior methods, with an average gain of about 3% across four metrics over the second-best model, S3Net. If that comparison holds, the contribution is a concrete architecture for cross-modal fusion that uses bidirectionally exchanged attention and stage-wise global context.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the dual mutual fusion module, consisting of a position mutual fusion (PMF) module and a channel mutual fusion (CMF) module. PMF computes per-position similarity between the fused feature map and each modality's own map by matrix multiplication, so spatial attention weights are exchanged in both directions; CMF does the same for channel attention. The second mechanism is the cascade transformer-infused reconstruction (CTR) decoder, which feeds each stage's fused features through a separate stage of a PVTv2 transformer and reconstructs the saliency map by letting high-level features guide low-level ones through upsampling, channel attention, and residual connections. Together these modules let local features gather global context while keeping each stage's features distinct, since the transformer stages do not share parameters.

What would settle it

Retrain the leading baselines, including S3Net and FCFNet, with the same training split, the same loss, and no extra priors or depth filtering, then recompute E-measure, S-measure, F-measure, and MAE with the same official evaluation tool; if GL-DMNet's average margin over S3Net falls well below 3%, the reported state-of-the-art claim would not survive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that mutual attention exchange between RGB, depth, and their fusion, in both spatial and channel dimensions, yields better saliency maps than unilateral or manual fusion. The paper's architecture encodes RGB and depth with ResNet-50 branches, runs the features through parallel position mutual fusion and channel mutual fusion modules, and reconstructs the saliency map with a cascade transformer-infused decoder based on PVTv2. The quantitative claim is that this design reaches best or second-best performance on nearly every metric of the six benchmarks, improving on S3Net by about 3% on average. Ablations trace the gain to the dual mutual fusion module, the transformer embedding, the reconstruction decoder, and the combination of BCE and IoU losses. The paper also claims robustness when depth is missing or low-quality, though it does not formalize a separate test for that case.

Load-bearing premise

The roughly 3% claim assumes the 24 comparison methods were evaluated under matched training and evaluation protocols, even though several of them were trained with extra supervision, discarded low-quality depth maps, or used different data splits.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If GL-DMNet's reported numbers hold, effective RGB-D fusion can be built by exchanging spatial and channel attention in both directions among RGB, depth, and their fusion, rather than by choosing a single fusion rule.
  • The stage-wise, non-shared transformer decoder provides a template for adding global context to multi-level fusion without repeatedly running a large transformer, which the paper connects to its reported 40 FPS inference speed.
  • On the six standard benchmarks, downstream applications that consume saliency maps would receive foreground masks that are on average about 3% closer to the ground truth than those of the runner-up among 24 compared methods.
  • Deep supervision with per-stage BCE and IoU losses is shown to speed convergence and improve the final single saliency output, suggesting that auxiliary multi-level outputs are worth retaining in similar decoding designs.
  • The paper's own tables show that FCFNet and S3Net still beat GL-DMNet on a few metric-dataset cells, so the claimed advantage is an average margin concentrated on some datasets rather than a universal win on every measurement.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because baseline scores are computed from published saliency maps rather than from retrained models, the roughly 3% average margin could shrink or disappear under a fully controlled re-training with identical supervision and data splits; this is a testable risk, not a claim the paper makes.
  • The mutual-attention fusion recipe of PMF plus CMF is modality-agnostic in form, so it could plausibly transfer to other paired-input tasks such as RGB-thermal detection or RGB-depth semantic segmentation, which face the same discrepancy problem.
  • A natural follow-up experiment would train GL-DMNet on RGB-only inputs, either by removing the depth branch or feeding it a constant, to quantify how much of the gain comes from depth information versus from the mutual fusion and decoder alone.
  • The paper's qualitative robustness to missing depth could be turned into a quantitative test by evaluating GL-DMNet on RGB-D benchmarks with depth maps artificially corrupted or set to zero, measuring the drop in each metric.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes GL-DMNet, an RGB-D salient object detection network combining ResNet-50 backbone branches for RGB and depth, a dual mutual fusion module with position mutual fusion (PMF) and channel mutual fusion (CMF), and a cascade transformer-infused reconstruction (CTR) decoder built on PVTv2-B2. The model is trained with deep supervision using a weighted BCE plus IoU loss. Experiments on six RGB-D SOD benchmark datasets compare against 24 published methods under four metrics, with additional PR curves, ablations of the fusion module, decoder, and loss, plus qualitative visualizations. The central claim is that GL-DMNet outperforms all 24 methods and achieves an average improvement of about 3% over the second-best method, S3Net.

Significance. If the central claim is supported, GL-DMNet would be a new state of the art on six commonly used RGB-D SOD benchmarks, with the PMF/CMF modules and CTR decoder as the enabling components. The paper has clear strengths: the architecture is described in detail with equations, the ablation study isolates the contribution of each major module, the training setup is reproducible on a single GPU, and the authors promise to release code and results. However, the headline SOTA claim is not yet adequately controlled: baseline numbers are taken from published saliency maps under heterogeneous training protocols, and the reported margins over the closest competitor are often at the level of 0.001-0.003 with no error bars or multi-seed statistics. The central significance therefore depends on verification under matched experimental conditions.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. IV-C / Abstract] The central claim that GL-DMNet 'performs better than 24 RGB-D SOD methods' and improves on the second-best model by ~3% is not based on a controlled comparison. Section IV-C states that baseline metrics are computed 'based on the saliency maps derived from their original papers,' but the baselines include methods trained under substantially different protocols: S3Net is semi-supervised with supplementary priors, FCFNet discards low-quality depth maps, DWD is trained without depth, DENet and DHFR are weakly supervised, and DLMNet is unsupervised. These methods are not retrained under the fully supervised protocol of Section IV-B, so the reported ranking may reflect protocol differences rather than architectural superiority. The magnitude of the claimed gain is also fragile: in Table II many GL-DMNet advantages over S3Net are 0.001-0.003 in E_xi, S_alpha, and F_beta, while S3Net actually wins STEREO S_alpha (0.913 vs 0.908) and NLPR MAE (0.021 vs 0.022), and ties on NLPR E_xi and S_alpha. The abstract's ~3% figure is driven largely by large relative MAE differences on SIP and DUT-RGBD and by averaging across datasets and metrics. The authors should either retrain all baselines under a matched protocol or explicitly restrict the claim to 'outperforms published saliency maps' and remove the 'For fair comparisons' wording in Section IV-C.
  2. [Sec. III-B, Eqs. (6)-(11)] The PMF module as written does not implement position mutual fusion. After reshaping f_RGB_i, f_D_i, and f_SP_i to R^{C x N}, Equation (6) computes M(f_SP_i \otimes (f_RGB_i)^T), which is a C x C matrix, not an N x N spatial attention map over positions. Equation (9) then multiplies the C x N feature f_RGB_i by this C x C matrix, so the operation mixes channels rather than attending to spatial positions. To obtain a genuine spatial attention map, the multiplication order should be reversed, e.g., (f_RGB_i)^T \otimes f_SP_i yielding an N x N map, with corresponding adjustments to Eqs. (9)-(11). As it stands, the PMF is formally analogous to the channel interaction in Eqs. (15)-(17), contradicting the claimed spatial/channel decomposition and the qualitative interpretation in Section IV-E.
  3. [Sec. IV-C / Table II] All quantitative results are single-run numbers with no error bars, no standard deviations, and no significance testing. Given that the closest competitor comparisons are frequently within 0.003 in E_xi, S_alpha, and F_beta, and that the paper's own training procedure involves a multi-phase freeze/unfreeze schedule with random augmentation, the reported differences are not shown to be statistically distinguishable from run-to-run variation. The authors should report mean and standard deviation over at least three independent training runs for their method, and ideally also for the closest baselines under a matched training protocol.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IV-A] The abstract and the conclusion say four evaluation metrics, while Section IV-A lists five metrics and also presents PR curves; please clarify the count.
  2. [Table II] In the CDINet row for NJUD, F_beta is reported as 0.827, which is inconsistent with the surrounding values and is likely a typo; the intended value is probably 0.927.
  3. [Eq. (33)] The mapping from the loss weights {0.8, 0.6, 0.4, 0.2} to decoder stages i=1..4 is not stated; please specify which weight corresponds to which level of deep supervision.
  4. [Eqs. (6)-(7)] The moment normalization M(x) = sign(x) * x^{-1/2} is not standard and is not defined for matrix-valued inputs with negative or zero entries; please define the intended element-wise operation and explain its purpose.
  5. [Sec. III-B] The notation Conv3(Conv1(...)) in Eqs. (1)-(2) and elsewhere is not defined in Table I; adding a convention for sequential composition would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claim is an empirical benchmark result, trained and evaluated on disjoint splits, with baseline numbers taken from external papers' released maps.

full rationale

The paper makes no formal derivation that could reduce to its inputs. GL-DMNet's modules (PMF, CMF, CTR) are architectural proposals, and the central claim is the Table II comparison against 24 methods. The evaluation protocol is standard: 700 NLPR + 800 DUT-RGBD + 1485 NJUD images are used for training and the remaining images plus SIP, STEREO, and SSD are used for testing, so the reported metrics are not defined in terms of the fitted parameters. The baseline numbers are computed from publicly released saliency maps of the original papers, which is external evidence rather than a self-citation. The ablations on NLPR and DUT-RGBD do involve design choices validated on datasets that also appear in the final table, and S3Net/FCFNet use different training protocols; these are genuine experimental-comparison concerns, but they are not circularity in the derivation-chain sense. No equation in the paper is equivalent to a fitted quantity by construction, no load-bearing self-citation is used to justify the architecture choice, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' prior work. The '~3% improvement' is an arithmetic summary of Table II, not a prediction derived from the model's assumptions.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new theoretical entities. It composes existing modules (DANet-style attention, CBAM, PVTv2, TriTransNet-style transformer embedding) into a new architecture. The main hand-set choices are loss weights, training schedule, resolution, and data augmentation, all of which can affect final benchmark numbers. The central empirical claim also depends on standard transfer-learning assumptions and on the correctness and comparability of third-party evaluation tools and released saliency maps.

free parameters (3)
  • Loss weights lambda_i for deep supervision = {0.8, 0.6, 0.4, 0.2}
    Chosen by hand in Eq. (33); no sensitivity analysis is reported, and these weights shape the training objective that produces the final saliency maps.
  • Training hyperparameters (learning rate, decay, epochs, freeze schedule) = 1e-4, decay 0.97, 200 epochs, freeze ResNet 30 epochs, freeze PVTv2 next 30 epochs
    Set manually in Sec. IV-B and not justified by ablations; likely tuned to maximize benchmark scores.
  • Input resolution and augmentation choices = 256x256; random crop, flip, rotation, color enhancement
    Fixed in Sec. IV-B; smaller than some SOD papers and affects all compared methods if not matched.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Pretrained ImageNet weights for ResNet-50 and PVTv2-B2 transfer to RGB-D salient object detection.
    Sec. IV-B uses these backbones without training from scratch; the paper does not test whether pretraining is necessary for the reported gains.
  • domain assumption Replicating the depth map into three channels and feeding it to an RGB-pretrained CNN is a sufficient depth encoding.
    Sec. IV-B states 'we replicate the input depth map into three channels'; no depth-specific input encoding is evaluated or compared.
  • domain assumption Official evaluation implementations and baseline-released saliency maps are correct and comparable.
    Sec. IV-C states 'All the evaluation metrics are calculated by the official evaluation tools'; errors in those tools or unreported training-protocol differences would change the ranking.
  • domain assumption The training and test data splits are the 'most common setup' of previous studies.
    Sec. IV-A cites [39], [64] for the split; no verification is provided that all 24 baselines used the same split.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dual Mutual Learning Network with Global-local Awareness for RGB-D Salient Object Detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O6PNMY64

@misc{pith2026250101648,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dual Mutual Learning Network with Global-local Awareness for RGB-D Salient Object Detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O6PNMY64}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01648}
}
read the original abstract

RGB-D salient object detection (SOD), aiming to highlight prominent regions of a given scene by jointly modeling RGB and depth information, is one of the challenging pixel-level prediction tasks. Recently, the dual-attention mechanism has been devoted to this area due to its ability to strengthen the detection process. However, most existing methods directly fuse attentional cross-modality features under a manual-mandatory fusion paradigm without considering the inherent discrepancy between the RGB and depth, which may lead to a reduction in performance. Moreover, the long-range dependencies derived from global and local information make it difficult to leverage a unified efficient fusion strategy. Hence, in this paper, we propose the GL-DMNet, a novel dual mutual learning network with global-local awareness. Specifically, we present a position mutual fusion module and a channel mutual fusion module to exploit the interdependencies among different modalities in spatial and channel dimensions. Besides, we adopt an efficient decoder based on cascade transformer-infused reconstruction to integrate multi-level fusion features jointly. Extensive experiments on six benchmark datasets demonstrate that our proposed GL-DMNet performs better than 24 RGB-D SOD methods, achieving an average improvement of ~3% across four evaluation metrics compared to the second-best model (S3Net). Codes and results are available at https://github.com/kingkung2016/GL-DMNet.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01648 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The results of our GL-DMNet and other representative methods, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Comparison between (a) FPN framework, (b) dense decode network, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Detailed framework of the proposed GL-DMNet. We adopt the ResNet-50 network to extract features of RGB and depth inputs, respectively. Then, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The details of position mutual fusion (PMF) module and channel mutual fusion (CMF) module. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visual comparisons of the proposed GL-DMNet and other state-of-the-art RGB-D SOD methods, including MIRV [70], HINet [13], DLMNet [71], [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: PR curves of different saliency detectors on six datasets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Visual comparison of saliency map results produced by different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Visual comparison of saliency map results produced by different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Feature visualizations of the PMF and CMF. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Rethinking rgb-d salient object detection: Models, data sets, and large-scale bench- marks,

    D.-P. Fan, Z. Lin, Z. Zhang, M. Zhu, and M.-M. Cheng, “Rethinking rgb-d salient object detection: Models, data sets, and large-scale bench- marks,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 2075–2089, 2021

    2021

  2. [2]

    Rgb-d salient object detection: A survey,

    T. Zhou, D.-P. Fan, M.-M. Cheng, J. Shen, and L. Shao, “Rgb-d salient object detection: A survey,” Computational Visual Media , vol. 7, pp. 37–69, 2021

    2021

  3. [3]

    Vision-based semantic segmentation in scene understanding for autonomous driving: Recent achievements, challenges, and outlooks,

    K. Muhammad, T. Hussain, H. Ullah, J. D. Ser, M. Rezaei, N. Kumar, M. Hijji, P. Bellavista, and V . H. C. de Albuquerque, “Vision-based semantic segmentation in scene understanding for autonomous driving: Recent achievements, challenges, and outlooks,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 22 694–22 715, 2022

    2022

  4. [4]

    Dreamt: Diversity enlarged mu- tual teaching for unsupervised domain adaptive person re-identification,

    Y . Tao, J. Zhang, J. Hong, and Y . Zhu, “Dreamt: Diversity enlarged mu- tual teaching for unsupervised domain adaptive person re-identification,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 25, pp. 4586–4597, 2023

    2023

  5. [5]

    Lightweight text- driven image editing with disentangled content and attributes,

    B. Li, X. Lin, B. Liu, Z.-F. He, and Y .-K. Lai, “Lightweight text- driven image editing with disentangled content and attributes,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 26, pp. 1829–1841, 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    Cross- modality deep feature learning for brain tumor segmentation,

    D. Zhang, G. Huang, Q. Zhang, J. Han, J. Han, and Y . Yu, “Cross- modality deep feature learning for brain tumor segmentation,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 110, p. 107562, 2021

    2021

  7. [7]

    Dual attention network for scene segmentation,

    J. Fu, J. Liu, H. Tian, Y . Li, Y . Bao, Z. Fang, and H. Lu, “Dual attention network for scene segmentation,” in 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2019, pp. 3141– 3149

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Catnet: A cascaded and aggregated transformer network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    F. Sun, P. Ren, B. Yin, F. Wang, and H. Li, “Catnet: A cascaded and aggregated transformer network for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 26, pp. 2249–2262, 2024

    work page 2024

Show all 86 references
  1. [9]

    Hi- danet: Rgb-d salient object detection via hierarchical depth awareness,

    Z. Wu, G. Allibert, F. Meriaudeau, C. Ma, and C. Demonceaux, “Hi- danet: Rgb-d salient object detection via hierarchical depth awareness,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 32, pp. 2160–2173, 2023. SUBMITTED TO IEEE TRANSCATION ON MULTIMEDIA 13

    2023

  2. [10]

    Tritransnet: Rgb-d salient object detection with a triplet transformer embedding network,

    Z. Liu, Y . Wang, Z. Tu, Y . Xiao, and B. Tang, “Tritransnet: Rgb-d salient object detection with a triplet transformer embedding network,” in Proceedings of the 29th ACM international conference on multimedia , 2021, pp. 4481–4490

    2021

  3. [11]

    Scene segmentation with dual relation-aware attention network,

    J. Fu, J. Liu, J. Jiang, Y . Li, Y . Bao, and H. Lu, “Scene segmentation with dual relation-aware attention network,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 2547–2560, 2021

    2021

  4. [12]

    M2rnet: Multi- modal and multi-scale refined network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    X. Fang, M. Jiang, J. Zhu, X. Shao, and H. Wang, “M2rnet: Multi- modal and multi-scale refined network for rgb-d salient object detection,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 135, p. 109139, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Cross-modal hierarchical interaction network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    H. Bi, R. Wu, Z. Liu, H. Zhu, C. Zhang, and T.-Z. Xiang, “Cross-modal hierarchical interaction network for rgb-d salient object detection,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 136, p. 109194, 2023

    2023

  6. [14]

    Airsod: A lightweight network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    Z. Zeng, H. Liu, F. Chen, and X. Tan, “Airsod: A lightweight network for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology , vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1656–1669, 2024

    2024

  7. [15]

    Feature pyramid networks for object detection,

    T.-Y . Lin, P. Doll´ar, R. Girshick, K. He, B. Hariharan, and S. Belongie, “Feature pyramid networks for object detection,” in 2017 IEEE Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2017, pp. 936–944

    2017

  8. [16]

    Densely connected convolutional networks,

    G. Huang, Z. Liu, L. Van Der Maaten, and K. Q. Weinberger, “Densely connected convolutional networks,” in 2017 IEEE Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2017, pp. 2261–2269

    2017

  9. [17]

    Grouptransnet: Group transformer network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    X. Fang, M. Jiang, J. Zhu, X. Shao, and H. Wang, “Grouptransnet: Group transformer network for rgb-d salient object detection,”Neurocomputing, vol. 594, p. 127865, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    Visual transformers: Token- based image representation and processing for computer vision,

    B. Wu, C. Xu, X. Dai, A. Wan, P. Zhang, Z. Yan, M. Tomizuka, J. Gonzalez, K. Keutzer, and P. Vajda, “Visual transformers: Token- based image representation and processing for computer vision,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.03677, 2020

    2006 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Exploiting global priors for rgb-d saliency detection,

    J. Ren, X. Gong, L. Yu, W. Zhou, and M. Y . Yang, “Exploiting global priors for rgb-d saliency detection,” in 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) , 2015, pp. 25–32

    2015

  12. [20]

    Local background enclosure for rgb-d salient object detection,

    D. Feng, N. Barnes, S. You, and C. McCarthy, “Local background enclosure for rgb-d salient object detection,” in 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2016, pp. 2343– 2350

    2016

  13. [21]

    Depth-aware salient object detection and segmentation via multiscale discriminative saliency fusion and bootstrap learning,

    H. Song, Z. Liu, H. Du, G. Sun, O. Le Meur, and T. Ren, “Depth-aware salient object detection and segmentation via multiscale discriminative saliency fusion and bootstrap learning,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 26, no. 9, pp. 4204–4216, 2017

    2017

  14. [22]

    Cross-stage multi-scale interaction network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    K. Yi, J. Zhu, F. Guo, and J. Xu, “Cross-stage multi-scale interaction network for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, vol. 29, pp. 2402–2406, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    Dcmnet: Discriminant and cross- modality network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    F. Wang, R. Wang, and F. Sun, “Dcmnet: Discriminant and cross- modality network for rgb-d salient object detection,” Expert Systems with Applications , vol. 214, p. 119047, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Feature calibrating and fusing network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    Q. Zhang, Q. Qin, Y . Yang, Q. Jiao, and J. Han, “Feature calibrating and fusing network for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology , vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1493– 1507, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Dgfnet: Depth-guided cross- modality fusion network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    F. Xiao, Z. Pu, J. Chen, and X. Gao, “Dgfnet: Depth-guided cross- modality fusion network for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 26, pp. 2648–2658, 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    Depth- induced gap-reducing network for rgb-d salient object detection: An interaction, guidance and refinement approach,

    X. Cheng, X. Zheng, J. Pei, H. Tang, Z. Lyu, and C. Chen, “Depth- induced gap-reducing network for rgb-d salient object detection: An interaction, guidance and refinement approach,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 25, pp. 4253–4266, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Robust perception and precise segmentation for scribble- supervised rgb-d saliency detection,

    L. Li, J. Han, N. Liu, S. Khan, H. Cholakkal, R. M. Anwer, and F. S. Khan, “Robust perception and precise segmentation for scribble- supervised rgb-d saliency detection,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 479–496, 2024

    2024

  20. [28]

    Magnet: Multi-scale awareness and global fusion network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    M. Zhong, J. Sun, P. Ren, F. Wang, and F. Sun, “Magnet: Multi-scale awareness and global fusion network for rgb-d salient object detection,” Knowledge-Based Systems , p. 112126, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Synthesizing supervision for learning deep saliency network without human annotation,

    D. Zhang, J. Han, Y . Zhang, and D. Xu, “Synthesizing supervision for learning deep saliency network without human annotation,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , vol. 42, no. 7, pp. 1755–1769, 2020

    2020

  22. [30]

    Attention is all you need,

    A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin, “Attention is all you need,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 30, 2017

    2017

  23. [31]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,

    A. Dosovitskiy, L. Beyer, A. Kolesnikov, D. Weissenborn, X. Zhai, T. Unterthiner, M. Dehghani, M. Minderer, G. Heigold, S. Gelly et al. , “An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929 , 2020

    2010 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Pyramid vision transformer: A versatile backbone for dense prediction without convolutions,

    W. Wang, E. Xie, X. Li, D.-P. Fan, K. Song, D. Liang, T. Lu, P. Luo, and L. Shao, “Pyramid vision transformer: A versatile backbone for dense prediction without convolutions,” in2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , 2021, pp. 548–558

    2021

  25. [33]

    Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows,

    Z. Liu, Y . Lin, Y . Cao, H. Hu, Y . Wei, Z. Zhang, S. Lin, and B. Guo, “Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows,” in 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2021, pp. 9992–10 002

    2021

  26. [34]

    Visual saliency transformer,

    N. Liu, N. Zhang, K. Wan, L. Shao, and J. Han, “Visual saliency transformer,” in 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2021, pp. 4702–4712

    2021

  27. [35]

    Swinnet: Swin transformer drives edge-aware rgb-d and rgb-t salient object detection,

    Z. Liu, Y . Tan, Q. He, and Y . Xiao, “Swinnet: Swin transformer drives edge-aware rgb-d and rgb-t salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology , vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 4486– 4497, 2022

    2022

  28. [36]

    Point-aware interaction and cnn-induced refinement network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    R. Cong, H. Liu, C. Zhang, W. Zhang, F. Zheng, R. Song, and S. Kwong, “Point-aware interaction and cnn-induced refinement network for rgb-d salient object detection,” in Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Multimedia , 2023, pp. 406–416

    2023

  29. [37]

    A uniform transformer-based structure for feature fusion and enhancement for rgb-d saliency detection,

    Y . Wang, X. Jia, L. Zhang, Y . Li, J. H. Elder, and H. Lu, “A uniform transformer-based structure for feature fusion and enhancement for rgb-d saliency detection,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 140, p. 109516, 2023

    2023

  30. [38]

    Tsvt: Token sparsification vision transformer for robust rgb-d salient object detection,

    L. Gao, B. Liu, P. Fu, and M. Xu, “Tsvt: Token sparsification vision transformer for robust rgb-d salient object detection,” Pattern Recogni- tion, vol. 148, p. 110190, 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    Transformer fusion and pixel- level contrastive learning for rgb-d salient object detection,

    J. Wu, F. Hao, W. Liang, and J. Xu, “Transformer fusion and pixel- level contrastive learning for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 26, pp. 1011–1026, 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    Cbam: Convolutional block attention module,

    S. Woo, J. Park, J.-Y . Lee, and I. S. Kweon, “Cbam: Convolutional block attention module,” in European conference on computer vision . Springer, 2018, pp. 3–19

    2018

  33. [41]

    Selective kernel networks,

    X. Li, W. Wang, X. Hu, and J. Yang, “Selective kernel networks,” in 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion (CVPR) , 2019, pp. 510–519

    2019

  34. [42]

    Strip pooling: Rethinking spatial pooling for scene parsing,

    Q. Hou, L. Zhang, M.-M. Cheng, and J. Feng, “Strip pooling: Rethinking spatial pooling for scene parsing,” in 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2020, pp. 4002– 4011

    2020

  35. [43]

    Coordinate attention for efficient mobile network design,

    Q. Hou, D. Zhou, and J. Feng, “Coordinate attention for efficient mobile network design,” in 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2021, pp. 13 708–13 717

    2021

  36. [44]

    Learning selective mutual attention and contrast for rgb-d saliency detection,

    N. Liu, N. Zhang, L. Shao, and J. Han, “Learning selective mutual attention and contrast for rgb-d saliency detection,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , vol. 44, no. 12, pp. 9026– 9042, 2022

    2022

  37. [45]

    Encoder deep interleaved network with multi-scale aggregation for rgb-d salient object detection,

    G. Feng, J. Meng, L. Zhang, and H. Lu, “Encoder deep interleaved network with multi-scale aggregation for rgb-d salient object detection,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 128, p. 108666, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    Boosting rgb-d saliency detection by leveraging unlabeled rgb images,

    X. Wang, L. Zhu, S. Tang, H. Fu, P. Li, F. Wu, Y . Yang, and Y . Zhuang, “Boosting rgb-d saliency detection by leveraging unlabeled rgb images,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 31, pp. 1107–1119, 2022

    2022

  39. [47]

    Cir- net: Cross-modality interaction and refinement for rgb-d salient object detection,

    R. Cong, Q. Lin, C. Zhang, C. Li, X. Cao, Q. Huang, and Y . Zhao, “Cir- net: Cross-modality interaction and refinement for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 31, pp. 6800– 6815, 2022

    2022

  40. [48]

    C 2dfnet: Criss- cross dynamic filter network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    M. Zhang, S. Yao, B. Hu, Y . Piao, and W. Ji, “C 2dfnet: Criss- cross dynamic filter network for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 25, pp. 5142–5154, 2023

    2023

  41. [49]

    Rethinking bisenet for real-time semantic segmentation,

    M. Fan, S. Lai, J. Huang, X. Wei, Z. Chai, J. Luo, and X. Wei, “Rethinking bisenet for real-time semantic segmentation,” in 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2021, pp. 9711–9720

    2021

  42. [50]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition,

    K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” in 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2016, pp. 770–778

    2016

  43. [51]

    Cross-modality discrepant interaction network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    C. Zhang, R. Cong, Q. Lin, L. Ma, F. Li, Y . Zhao, and S. Kwong, “Cross-modality discrepant interaction network for rgb-d salient object detection,” in Proceedings of the 29th ACM international conference on multimedia, 2021, pp. 2094–2102

    2021

  44. [52]

    Reliable mutual distillation for medical image segmentation under imperfect annotations,

    C. Fang, Q. Wang, L. Cheng, Z. Gao, C. Pan, Z. Cao, Z. Zheng, and D. Zhang, “Reliable mutual distillation for medical image segmentation under imperfect annotations,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging , vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 1720–1734, 2023

    2023

  45. [53]

    Incremental cross-view mutual distillation for self-supervised medical ct synthesis,

    C. Fang, L. Wang, D. Zhang, J. Xu, Y . Yuan, and J. Han, “Incremental cross-view mutual distillation for self-supervised medical ct synthesis,” in 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition (CVPR) , 2022, pp. 20 645–20 654. SUBMITTED TO IEEE TRANSCAT...

    2022

  46. [54]

    Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift,

    S. Ioffe and C. Szegedy, “Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift,” in International conference on machine learning , 2015, pp. 448–456

    2015

  47. [55]

    Pvt v2: Improved baselines with pyramid vision transformer,

    W. Wang, E. Xie, X. Li, D.-P. Fan, K. Song, D. Liang, T. Lu, P. Luo, and L. Shao, “Pvt v2: Improved baselines with pyramid vision transformer,” Computational Visual Media , vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 415–424, 2022

    2022

  48. [56]

    Squeeze-and-excitation networks,

    J. Hu, L. Shen, and G. Sun, “Squeeze-and-excitation networks,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 7132–7141

    2018

  49. [57]

    A tutorial on the cross-entropy method,

    P.-T. De Boer, D. P. Kroese, S. Mannor, and R. Y . Rubinstein, “A tutorial on the cross-entropy method,” Annals of operations research , vol. 134, pp. 19–67, 2005

    2005

  50. [58]

    Deeproadmapper: Extracting road topology from aerial images,

    G. M ´attyus, W. Luo, and R. Urtasun, “Deeproadmapper: Extracting road topology from aerial images,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , 2017, pp. 3458–3466

    2017

  51. [59]

    Dmra: Depth-induced multi-scale recurrent attention network for rgb-d saliency detection,

    W. Ji, G. Yan, J. Li, Y . Piao, S. Yao, M. Zhang, L. Cheng, and H. Lu, “Dmra: Depth-induced multi-scale recurrent attention network for rgb-d saliency detection,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 31, pp. 2321–2336, 2022

    2022

  52. [60]

    Depth saliency based on anisotropic center-surround difference,

    R. Ju, L. Ge, W. Geng, T. Ren, and G. Wu, “Depth saliency based on anisotropic center-surround difference,” in 2014 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP) , 2014, pp. 1115–1119

    2014

  53. [61]

    Leveraging stereopsis for saliency analysis,

    Y . Niu, Y . Geng, X. Li, and F. Liu, “Leveraging stereopsis for saliency analysis,” in 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2012, pp. 454–461

    2012

  54. [62]

    Rgbd salient object detection: A benchmark and algorithms,

    H. Peng, B. Li, W. Xiong, W. Hu, and R. Ji, “Rgbd salient object detection: A benchmark and algorithms,” in European conference on computer vision . Springer, 2014, pp. 92–109

    2014

  55. [63]

    A three-pathway psychobiological framework of salient object detection using stereoscopic technology,

    G. Li and C. Zhu, “A three-pathway psychobiological framework of salient object detection using stereoscopic technology,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCVW) , 2017, pp. 3008–3014

    2017

  56. [64]

    Moadnet: Mobile asymmetric dual-stream networks for real-time and lightweight rgb-d salient object detection,

    X. Jin, K. Yi, and J. Xu, “Moadnet: Mobile asymmetric dual-stream networks for real-time and lightweight rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology , vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 7632–7645, 2022

    2022

  57. [65]

    Enhanced-alignment measure for binary foreground map evaluation,

    D.-P. Fan, C. Gong, Y . Cao, B. Ren, M.-M. Cheng, and A. Borji, “Enhanced-alignment measure for binary foreground map evaluation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10421 , 2018

    2018 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Structure-measure: A new way to evaluate foreground maps,

    D.-P. Fan, M.-M. Cheng, Y . Liu, T. Li, and A. Borji, “Structure-measure: A new way to evaluate foreground maps,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , 2017, pp. 4558–4567

    2017

  59. [67]

    Frequency-tuned salient region detection,

    R. Achanta, S. Hemami, F. Estrada, and S. Susstrunk, “Frequency-tuned salient region detection,” in 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , 2009, pp. 1597–1604

    2009

  60. [68]

    Salient object detection: A benchmark,

    A. Borji, M.-M. Cheng, H. Jiang, and J. Li, “Salient object detection: A benchmark,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 5706–5722, 2015

    2015

  61. [69]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,

    D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 , 2014

    2014 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Mutual information regularization for weakly-supervised rgb-d salient object detection,

    A. Li, Y . Mao, J. Zhang, and Y . Dai, “Mutual information regularization for weakly-supervised rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology , vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 397– 410, 2024

    2024

  63. [71]

    Depth-inspired label mining for unsupervised rgb-d salient object detection,

    T. Yang, Y . Wang, L. Zhang, J. Qi, and H. Lu, “Depth-inspired label mining for unsupervised rgb-d salient object detection,” in Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia , 2022, pp. 5669–5677

    2022

  64. [72]

    Ccafnet: Crossflow and cross-scale adaptive fusion network for detecting salient objects in rgb- d images,

    W. Zhou, Y . Zhu, J. Lei, J. Wan, and L. Yu, “Ccafnet: Crossflow and cross-scale adaptive fusion network for detecting salient objects in rgb- d images,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 24, pp. 2192–2204, 2022

    2022

  65. [73]

    Weakly supervised rgb-d salient object detection with prediction consistency training and active scribble boosting,

    Y . Xu, X. Yu, J. Zhang, L. Zhu, and D. Wang, “Weakly supervised rgb-d salient object detection with prediction consistency training and active scribble boosting,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 31, pp. 2148–2161, 2022

    2022

  66. [74]

    Unified information fusion network for multi-modal rgb-d and rgb-t salient object detection,

    W. Gao, G. Liao, S. Ma, G. Li, Y . Liang, and W. Lin, “Unified information fusion network for multi-modal rgb-d and rgb-t salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 2091–2106, 2022

    2022

  67. [75]

    Deep rgb-d saliency detection with depth-sensitive attention and automatic multi-modal fu- sion,

    P. Sun, W. Zhang, H. Wang, S. Li, and X. Li, “Deep rgb-d saliency detection with depth-sensitive attention and automatic multi-modal fu- sion,” in 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , 2021, pp. 1407–1417

    2021

  68. [76]

    Deep hypersphere feature regularization for weakly supervised rgb-d salient object detec- tion,

    Z. Liu, M. Hayat, H. Yang, D. Peng, and Y . Lei, “Deep hypersphere feature regularization for weakly supervised rgb-d salient object detec- tion,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 32, pp. 5423–5437, 2023

    2023

  69. [77]

    S 3 net: Self-supervised self-ensembling network for semi-supervised rgb-d salient object detection,

    L. Zhu, X. Wang, P. Li, X. Yang, Q. Zhang, W. Wang, C.-B. Sch ¨onlieb, and C. L. P. Chen, “S 3 net: Self-supervised self-ensembling network for semi-supervised rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 25, pp. 676–689, 2023

    2023

  70. [78]

    Mobilesal: Extremely efficient rgb-d salient object detection,

    Y .-H. Wu, Y . Liu, J. Xu, J.-W. Bian, Y .-C. Gu, and M.-M. Cheng, “Mobilesal: Extremely efficient rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , vol. 44, no. 12, pp. 10 261–10 269, 2022

    2022

  71. [79]

    Siamese network for rgb-d salient object detection and beyond,

    K. Fu, D.-P. Fan, G.-P. Ji, Q. Zhao, J. Shen, and C. Zhu, “Siamese network for rgb-d salient object detection and beyond,” IEEE Transac- tions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 5541–5559, 2022

    2022

  72. [80]

    Deep rgb-d saliency detection without depth,

    Y .-f. Zhang, J. Zheng, W. Jia, W. Huang, L. Li, N. Liu, F. Li, and X. He, “Deep rgb-d saliency detection without depth,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, vol. 24, pp. 755–767, 2022

    2022

  73. [81]

    Depth quality- inspired feature manipulation for efficient rgb-d salient object detection,

    W. Zhang, G.-P. Ji, Z. Wang, K. Fu, and Q. Zhao, “Depth quality- inspired feature manipulation for efficient rgb-d salient object detection,” in Proceedings of the 29th ACM international conference on multimedia , 2021, pp. 731–740

    2021

  74. [82]

    Bilateral attention network for rgb-d salient object detection,

    Z. Zhang, Z. Lin, J. Xu, W.-D. Jin, S.-P. Lu, and D.-P. Fan, “Bilateral attention network for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 30, pp. 1949–1961, 2021

    1949

  75. [83]

    Depth-quality-aware salient object detection,

    C. Chen, J. Wei, C. Peng, and H. Qin, “Depth-quality-aware salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 30, pp. 2350–2363, 2021

    2021

  76. [84]

    Data-level recombination and lightweight fusion scheme for rgb-d salient object detection,

    X. Wang, S. Li, C. Chen, Y . Fang, A. Hao, and H. Qin, “Data-level recombination and lightweight fusion scheme for rgb-d salient object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , vol. 30, pp. 458– 471, 2021

    2021

  77. [85]

    cmsalgan: Rgb-d salient object detection with cross-view generative adversarial networks,

    B. Jiang, Z. Zhou, X. Wang, J. Tang, and B. Luo, “cmsalgan: Rgb-d salient object detection with cross-view generative adversarial networks,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia , vol. 23, pp. 1343–1353, 2021

    2021

  78. [86]

    Irfr-net: Interactive recursive feature-reshaping network for detecting salient objects in rgb-d images,

    W. Zhou, Q. Guo, J. Lei, L. Yu, and J.-N. Hwang, “Irfr-net: Interactive recursive feature-reshaping network for detecting salient objects in rgb-d images,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , pp. 1–13, 2021. Kang Yi received the B.S. degree from China A...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.