2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103994
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rapid data annotation for sand-like granular instance segmentation using mask-RCNN

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Comparing the four methods, figure 6(b) shows that YOLACT [22][23][24] cannot handle sticky and complex images with too much noise well, and a considerable amount of redundant recognition and undersegmentation occur because of its focus on speed improvement at the expense of overall accuracy. Figure 6(c) shows that Mask R-CNN [25][26][27], as a classic instance segmentation approach, does not achieve good results in segmenting coal dust adhesive images because the influence of particle agglomeration makes the accurate identification of particle outlines difficult, which results in mis-segmentation. Figure 6(d) shows that BlendMask [28][29][30] has slightly improved the accuracy and speed compared with Mask R-CNN, whereas if the segmented target is irregular, the segmentation accuracy is significantly reduced, resulting in more improper segmentation.…”
Section: Coal Dust Image Segmentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparing the four methods, figure 6(b) shows that YOLACT [22][23][24] cannot handle sticky and complex images with too much noise well, and a considerable amount of redundant recognition and undersegmentation occur because of its focus on speed improvement at the expense of overall accuracy. Figure 6(c) shows that Mask R-CNN [25][26][27], as a classic instance segmentation approach, does not achieve good results in segmenting coal dust adhesive images because the influence of particle agglomeration makes the accurate identification of particle outlines difficult, which results in mis-segmentation. Figure 6(d) shows that BlendMask [28][29][30] has slightly improved the accuracy and speed compared with Mask R-CNN, whereas if the segmented target is irregular, the segmentation accuracy is significantly reduced, resulting in more improper segmentation.…”
Section: Coal Dust Image Segmentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 2 illustrates the architecture of Mask-RCNN. At a high level, Mask-RCNN consists of several components: Backbone, Region Proposal Network (RPN), ROI Classifier and Bounding Box Regressor, and Segmentation Masks [20]. The backbone is a Feature Pyramid Network (FPN) [21][22] style feature extractor.…”
Section: Mask-rcnn Architecturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The precision and recall rates were 97.31% and 95.70%, respectively. Zhang et al (2022) developed a mask-labeling methodology for particles with a varying degree of overlap that can establish a large and diverse training set without manual labeling. This could be an efficient sample-labeling method.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%