text: Adversarial training has been recently employed for realizing structured semantic segmentation, in which the aim is to preserve higher-level scene structural consistencies in dense predictions. However, as we show, value-based discrimination between the predictions from the segmentation network and ground-truth annotations can hinder the training process from learning to improve structural qualities as well as disabling the network from properly expressing uncertainties. In this paper, we rethink adversarial training for semantic segmentation and propose to formulate the fake real discrimination framework with a correct incorrect training objective. More specifically, we replace the discriminator with a "gambler" network that learns to spot and distribute its budget in areas where the predictions are clearly wrong, while the segmenter network tries to leave no clear clues for the gambler where to bet. Empirical evaluation on two road-scene semantic segmentation tasks shows that not only does the proposed method re-enable expressing uncertainties, it also improves pixel-wise and structure-based metrics.
  @cite_14: Adversarial training has been shown to produce state of the art results for generative image modeling. In this paper we propose an adversarial training approach to train semantic segmentation models. We train a convolutional semantic segmentation network along with an adversarial network that discriminates segmentation maps coming either from the ground truth or from the segmentation network. The motivation for our approach is that it can detect and correct higher-order inconsistencies between ground truth segmentation maps and the ones produced by the segmentation net. Our experiments show that our adversarial training approach leads to improved accuracy on the Stanford Background and PASCAL VOC 2012 datasets.
summary: @cite_14 also discuss the value-based discrimination issue, which they attempt to alleviate by feeding the discriminator with a Cartesian product of the prediction maps and the input image channels. However, their followed strategy resulted in no improvements as reported. This can be attributed to remaining value-based evidence based on values distribution granularity. For instance, a very tiny response to a first-layer edge detector, in this case, can already signify a fake data sample.