Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
OBJECT DETECTION: MODEL COMPARISON ON AUTOMATED DOCUMENT CONTENT INTERPRETATION - A performance evaluation of common object detection models
Umeå University, Faculty of Science and Technology, Department of Computing Science.
2019 (English)Independent thesis Advanced level (degree of Master (Two Years)), 20 credits / 30 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

Manually supervising a million documents yearly becomes an exhaustive task. A step towards automating this process is to interpret and classify the contents of a document. This thesis examines and evaluates different object detection models in the task to localize and classify multiple objects within a document to find the best model for the situation. The theory of artificial neural networks is explained, and the convolutional neural network and how it is used to perform object detection. Googles Tensorflow Object Detection API is implemented and models and backbones are configured for training and evaluation. Data is collected to construct the data set, and useful metrics to use in the evaluation pipeline are explained. The models are compared both category wise and summarized, using mean average precision (mAP) over several intersection over union (IoU) thresholds, inference time, memory usage, optimal localization recall precision (oLRP) error and using optimized thresholds based on localization, recall and precision. Finally we determine if some model is better suited for certain situations and tasks. When using optimal confidence thresholds different models performed best on different categories. The overall best detector for the task was considered R-FCN inceptionv2 based on its detection performance, speed and memory usage. A reflection of the results and evaluation methods are discussed and strategies for improvement mentioned as future work.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. , p. 50
Series
UMNAD ; 1209
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-164767OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-164767DiVA, id: diva2:1366907
External cooperation
ITS
Educational program
Master of Science Programme in Computing Science and Engineering
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2019-10-31 Created: 2019-10-31 Last updated: 2019-10-31Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1259 kB)9 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1259 kBChecksum SHA-512
d37c19bba1bd6dae92eb27163c98f539b1b90594ba58317f7c18ff7aacde44107a86bd2cbc8735614c6b4854761f96fe531cffdfb48017ee2a57436588e17cab
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
Department of Computing Science
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 9 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 90 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf