text: In this paper, a unified approach is presented to transfer learning that addresses several source and target domain label-space and annotation assumptions with a single model. It is particularly effective in handling a challenging case, where source and target label-spaces are disjoint, and outperforms alternatives in both unsupervised and semi-supervised settings. The key ingredient is a common representation termed Common Factorised Space. It is shared between source and target domains, and trained with an unsupervised factorisation loss and a graph-based loss. With a wide range of experiments, we demonstrate the flexibility, relevance and efficacy of our method, both in the challenging cases with disjoint label spaces, and in the more conventional cases such as unsupervised domain adaptation, where the source and target domains share the same label-sets.
  @cite_7: State-of-the-art object detection networks depend on region proposal algorithms to hypothesize object locations. Advances like SPPnet [7] and Fast R-CNN [5] have reduced the running time of these detection networks, exposing region proposal computation as a bottleneck. In this work, we introduce a Region Proposal Network (RPN) that shares full-image convolutional features with the detection network, thus enabling nearly cost-free region proposals. An RPN is a fully-convolutional network that simultaneously predicts object bounds and objectness scores at each position. RPNs are trained end-to-end to generate high-quality region proposals, which are used by Fast R-CNN for detection. With a simple alternating optimization, RPN and Fast R-CNN can be trained to share convolutional features. For the very deep VGG-16 model [19], our detection system has a frame rate of 5fps (including all steps) on a GPU, while achieving state-of-the-art object detection accuracy on PASCAL VOC 2007 (73.2 mAP) and 2012 (70.4 mAP) using 300 proposals per image. Code is available at https: github.com ShaoqingRen faster_rcnn.
  @cite_9: Many deep neural networks trained on natural images exhibit a curious phenomenon in common: on the first layer they learn features similar to Gabor filters and color blobs. Such first-layer features appear not to be specific to a particular dataset or task, but general in that they are applicable to many datasets and tasks. Features must eventually transition from general to specific by the last layer of the network, but this transition has not been studied extensively. In this paper we experimentally quantify the generality versus specificity of neurons in each layer of a deep convolutional neural network and report a few surprising results. Transferability is negatively affected by two distinct issues: (1) the specialization of higher layer neurons to their original task at the expense of performance on the target task, which was expected, and (2) optimization difficulties related to splitting networks between co-adapted neurons, which was not expected. In an example network trained on ImageNet, we demonstrate that either of these two issues may dominate, depending on whether features are transferred from the bottom, middle, or top of the network. We also document that the transferability of features decreases as the distance between the base task and target task increases, but that transferring features even from distant tasks can be better than using random features. A final surprising result is that initializing a network with transferred features from almost any number of layers can produce a boost to generalization that lingers even after fine-tuning to the target dataset.
  @cite_6: A major assumption in many machine learning and data mining algorithms is that the training and future data must be in the same feature space and have the same distribution. However, in many real-world applications, this assumption may not hold. For example, we sometimes have a classification task in one domain of interest, but we only have sufficient training data in another domain of interest, where the latter data may be in a different feature space or follow a different data distribution. In such cases, knowledge transfer, if done successfully, would greatly improve the performance of learning by avoiding much expensive data-labeling efforts. In recent years, transfer learning has emerged as a new learning framework to address this problem. This survey focuses on categorizing and reviewing the current progress on transfer learning for classification, regression, and clustering problems. In this survey, we discuss the relationship between transfer learning and other related machine learning techniques such as domain adaptation, multitask learning and sample selection bias, as well as covariate shift. We also explore some potential future issues in transfer learning research.
  @cite_0: Recent advances in object detection are mainly driven by deep learning with large-scale detection benchmarks. However, the fully-annotated training set is often limited for a target detection task, which may deteriorate the performance of deep detectors. To address this challenge, we propose a novel low-shot transfer detector (LSTD) in this paper, where we leverage rich source-domain knowledge to construct an effective target-domain detector with very few training examples. The main contributions are described as follows. First, we design a flexible deep architecture of LSTD to alleviate transfer difficulties in low-shot detection. This architecture can integrate the advantages of both SSD and Faster RCNN in a unified deep framework. Second, we introduce a novel regularized transfer learning framework for low-shot detection, where the transfer knowledge (TK) and background depression (BD) regularizations are proposed to leverage object knowledge respectively from source and target domains, in order to further enhance fine-tuning with a few target images. Finally, we examine our LSTD on a number of challenging low-shot detection experiments, where LSTD outperforms other state-of-the-art approaches. The results demonstrate that LSTD is a preferable deep detector for low-shot scenarios.
  @cite_19: The explosion of image data on the Internet has the potential to foster more sophisticated and robust models and algorithms to index, retrieve, organize and interact with images and multimedia data. But exactly how such data can be harnessed and organized remains a critical problem. We introduce here a new database called “ImageNet”, a large-scale ontology of images built upon the backbone of the WordNet structure. ImageNet aims to populate the majority of the 80,000 synsets of WordNet with an average of 500-1000 clean and full resolution images. This will result in tens of millions of annotated images organized by the semantic hierarchy of WordNet. This paper offers a detailed analysis of ImageNet in its current state: 12 subtrees with 5247 synsets and 3.2 million images in total. We show that ImageNet is much larger in scale and diversity and much more accurate than the current image datasets. Constructing such a large-scale database is a challenging task. We describe the data collection scheme with Amazon Mechanical Turk. Lastly, we illustrate the usefulness of ImageNet through three simple applications in object recognition, image classification and automatic object clustering. We hope that the scale, accuracy, diversity and hierarchical structure of ImageNet can offer unparalleled opportunities to researchers in the computer vision community and beyond.
  @cite_17: 
summary: Transfer learning (TL) aims to transfer knowledge from one domain task to improve performance on the another @cite_6 . The most widely used TL technique for deep networks is fine-tuning @cite_9 @cite_0 @cite_7 . Instead of training a target network from scratch, its weights are initialised by a pre-trained model from another task such as ImageNet @cite_19 classification. While fine-tuning reduces label requirement compared to learning the target problem from scratch, it is prone to over-fitting if target labels are very few @cite_9 . Therefore, it is ineffective for very sparsely supervised DLSTL, and not applicable to unsupervised DLSTL. Moreover, vanilla TL does not exploit available unlabelled samples for the target problem (i.e. semi-supervised TL). The most related method to ours is @cite_17 which does exploit both unlabelled and few labelled data, i.e., semi-supervised DLSTL. However like other TL methods, it does not generalise to the unsupervised DLSTL setting where no target annotations are available.