Scientific Journal of Informatics

Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021

p-ISSN 2407-7658 http://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/sji e-ISSN 2460-0040

Object Detection in Last Decade - A Survey*

Usama Arshad1*, Ali Raza2

1,2
Department of Computer Science, COMSATS University Islamabad, Pakistan

Abstract
Purpose: In the last decade, object detection is one of the interesting topics that played an important role in
revolutionizing the present era. Especially when it comes to computer vision, object detection is a challenging and most
fundamental problem. Researchers in the last decade enhanced object detection and made many advanced discoveries
using technological advancements.
Methods: This research work describes the advancements in object detection over the last 10 years (2010-2020).
Different papers published in last 10 years related to object detection and its types are discussed with respect to their
role in the advancement of object detection.
Result: This research work also describes different types of object detection, which include text detection, face
detection etc. It clearly describes the changes in object detection techniques over the period of last 10 years. Object
detection is divided into two groups. General detection and Task-based detection. General detection is discussed
chronologically and with its different variants while task-based detection includes many state-of-the-art algorithms and
techniques according to tasks. This paper also described the basic comparison of how some algorithms and techniques
have been updated and played a major role in advancements of different fields related to object detection.
Novelty: This research concludes that the most important advancements that happened in last decade and future is
promising much more advancement in object detection on the basis of work done in this decade.

Keywords: Computer Vision, Object Detection, Text Detection, Face Detection, YOLO, RCNN, Fast RCNN.
Received February 2021 / Revised February 2021 / Accepted March 2021

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

INTRODUCTION
Object detection is the detection of different kinds of objects and assigning them to classes; it is one of the
fundamental tasks of computer vision [1]. Computer vision is an emerging field and its advancement is
necessary for the overall revolution in computer science. Object detection involves some main elements
like datasets, algorithms, and techniques. In object detection, normally have a dataset of some objects and
this study wants the computer to detect those objects without telling the computer about objects. The whole
process is divided into many parts and learning can be of many types. The types of learning include
supervised and unsupervised learning. In supervised learning, the model labeled data to learn and then
detect data in the testing phase while in unsupervised models no labeled data is provided to model and
model learn by itself by calculation of loss [2]. As object detection is fundamental for computer vision, it
is the basis of different tasks in computer vision. Some of the most important object detection based tasks
include activity recognition [3], image captioning [4], face detection and recognition [5], object tracking,
image segmentation, etc. According to its applications object detection can be divided into two types. One
is general detection, which includes detection of real-world objects. Much work is being done on this
especially using You ONLY LOOK ONCE (YOLO) algorithm. It real-time object detection [6]. The other
type can be called application-based object detection, in this type object detection is used according to its
need to get work done. The main work about object detection actually started after 2012 with the proposed
models of Regional Convolutional Neural Network (RCNN) [7], FAST Regional Convolutional Neural
Network (Fast RCNN) [8], and FASTER Regional Convolutional Neural Network (Faster RCNN) [9].
These models completely changed the working of historical models and brought a revolution in general
object detection. Soon after them YOLO [10] and its three versions one after another made high
contributions to advancement in object detection and different fields. However, yet study have to face many
challenges in object detection to make it more fast and accurate.

For a long time, object detection faced issues related to speed, accuracy, and space. The models after 2012
were mostly two stage detectors [11], In the last decade different two stage and one stage models are

*
Corresponding author.
Email addresses: [email protected] (Arshad), [email protected] (Raza)
DOI:10.15294/sji.v8i1.28956

60 | Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021

proposed. The main issue of the models is that the single stage models are fast and simple however, they
are less accurate as compared to two stage models. The main research work in single stage detectors [12]
is done to increase the accuracy on different datasets, while the work done on two stage detectors is to
increase the speed and simplicity of models. In the present era, object detection is being used on a vast scale
due to its advancements. Real-world uses also include video surveillance for security purposes. The latest
algorithms can easily detect any face in a crowd with high accuracy and precision making it easier for
security agencies to find the criminals. Moreover, the industrial use is tremendous, Automatic robots are
working in different industries doing the work faster and better. The Medical field is also being benefited
from object detection. Especially after 5g technology, object detection can have much more efficiency than
before. The last 10 years, object detection was not as good as it is today. Moreover, especially after 5g [13],
cannot imagine what great future advancements that will have in the next 10 years. In this paper describes
the two types of advancements in object detection. One is the advancement in general object detection and
the second is the advancement in application-based object detection. The paper thoroughly describes and
compare some of the most important techniques and models proposed and used in last 10 years. These
methodologies played an important role in the advancement of computer vision and many other fields by
making object detection better.

Datasets
The most important part of object detection is datasets. Many datasets are made in the last decade, which
is publically available for researchers to use for their research to increase the effectiveness of object
detection [14]. Some of most important and constantly used datasets include MS-COCO [15], Pascal
VOC12 [16], ILSVRC [17], Open images [18]. Many researchers work hard to make datasets necessary for
training and testing the latest algorithms and techniques for object detection. The available datasets are also
constantly improved each year in yearly challenge events.

MS-COCO
It is one of the most used datasets since 2015. Since 2015 there is an annual competition held for
improvement and innovations in the dataset. It has fewer object instances and more number object
categories especially as compared to ILSVRC. As compared to other datasets commonly used this dataset
is much better [15]. In MS-COCO per instance, segmentation is done and each object is labeled on instance
level apart from bounding boxes. This kind of structure helps in better localization. Moreover, the dataset
comprises more small and dense objects as compared to other datasets. With passing time, this dataset is
widely used and has become a standard for researchers. Especially with YOLO algorithms, MS-COCO
gives the best results. To explain the effectiveness used MS-COCO-17 as an example. This dataset contains
164k images, total of 80 categories, and 897k objects. This kind of dataset improves the overall process and
makes object detection faster and accurate.

ILSVRC
ImageNet large-scale visual recognition challenge is another one of its kind events. It started in 2010 and
after that, it was organized each year. The dataset produced and improved was used in many researches and
is constantly used by researchers. The number of total visual objects present in the dataset are about 200.
Images and objects may differ in different versions of datasets for example the ILSVRC-14 has around
517k images and number of objects used are around 534k [17].

Open Images
This dataset is more about task-oriented research rather than just visual detection. The dataset started in
2018 with Open Image Detection (OID) [18]. There are two main tasks for this dataset. The first task is
standard object detection while the second task is the detection of visual relationships. This means more
detection of relations between paired objects. The total images in the dataset are around 1910k. The total
object category in the dataset is around 600 while the total bounding boxes are around 15440k.

Pascal VOC
Pascal VOC is one of the old challenges, which started in 2005 and remained till 2012. In this time period,
the dataset performed well for different algorithms and tasks. The most used versions of Pascal VOC are
VOC07 and VOC12 [16]. Different versions consisted of images from 5k to 12k. As many new and
improved datasets were introduced like MS-COCO. The use of Pascal VOC became less with time. Now it
is used as testing for some scenarios.

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021 | 61

Specific Datasets
Apart from these datasets, that have many other task-based datasets used by researchers. Researchers may
use many datasets that are already available or may introduce their own datasets for their research.
Introduction of new dataset is also a great contribution and may help many other researchers in their
research. Specifically, in task-based detection, researchers need specific datasets. For example, for
pedestrian detection specific datasets are used only for the specific task.

METHODS
Two types of advancements in object detection are discussed. One is the advancement in general object
detection and the second is the advancement in application-based object detection. The paper thoroughly
describes and compares some of the most important techniques and models proposed and used in the last
10 years. These methodologies played an important role in the advancement of computer vision and many
other fields by making object detection better. The best papers are taken depending upon their use and
popularity in literature. Figure 1 clearly shows our methodology to collect the best research in chronological
order.

Figure 1. Methodology to Collect the Best Research in Chronological Order

General Detection
The work done on object detection often refers to a particular application or task. However, some algorithms
and techniques are only focused on improving general object detection. In this type, choose the algorithm
and weights and customize most of the things. Results may vary according to customizations. Machine
learning is flourishing in sense of computer vision especially object detection and fast-moving object
detection [19]. Mostly deep convolution neural networks [20] are used for this purpose trained on Image
Net dataset [21]. Faster RCNN and YOLO are currently used. Old methods of object detection are for low-
resolution images and need more methods for high-resolution images and videos. Low-resolution images
are mostly used because they are time and cost efficient in most cases but they sacrifice accuracy. The data
sets publically available are also mostly comprised of low-resolution images. With the latest cameras, using
high resolution data so need models to process these data for object detection. Current models are limited
in terms of high-resolution data, they use two base approaches either to downscale an image to detect
objects which sacrifice accuracy and most of data is lost or cropping image into smaller parts to detect
objects but this is costly in terms of speed [22]. Talk about the last decade, improved object detection
slowed down from 2010 to 2012. However, era after 2012 shows great improvement in object detection
models. Especially from 2014 onwards with the model of RCNN proposed. These models gave new life to
convolutional neural networks. However, The models after 2012 were mostly two stage detectors. In the
last decade, different two stage and one stage models are proposed. The main issue of the models is that the
single stage models are fast and simple however, they are less accurate as compared to two stage models.
The main research work in single stage detectors is done to increase the accuracy on different datasets,
while the work done on two stage detectors is to increase the speed and simplicity of models.

62 | Scientific Journal of Informatics , Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021

RCNN
Region based Convolutional Neural Network (RCNN) played an important role in object detection from a
long time [7]. The main idea behind RCNN is to select some parts of image and detect. Now the next
question was how the area is selected and how much region is selected. The image can consist of huge area
that do not need to process all regions to solve this process only 2k region is used called as proposal. This
proposal is selected by a selection algorithm. The selected parts are converted to fixed size images and then
sent to a convolution network for detection. This convolutional neural network is normally trained on a
dataset of ImageNet. This made things easier for object detection for a long time but as it had many
drawbacks like those that have to select 2k regions from a single image making detection slower. When
you look at the structure of RCNN given in Figure 2 taken from [7] can easily see four different parts of
structure.

Figure 2. RCNN Structure [7]

In first part input image is taken by the structure. In second part Region proposals are extracted from image
and these proposals consist of 2k regions. The the model computes the convolutional neural network (CNN)
features. In part, four regions are classified. However soon after RCNN in 2014, Spatial Pyramid Pooling
Networks (SPPNET) [23] was proposed which solved many such problems. The best thing done in this
model was that the model only looks once on the image to get regions, Secondly, as the RCNN it does not
have to take fixed image sizes, It can work on image of any size and generate fixed size representations.
SPPNET solved the issue of speed, however it was still not good in some aspects. For example, it was
performing best for fully connected layers but not the same for partially connected layers. In 2015, these
problems were solved as the Fast RCNN was proposed. Much work was done using SPPNET for this period
of time. Some of the tasks done using SPPNET include image processing, Food classification [24],
Semantic Segmentation [25].

Fast RCNN
The author, who proposed RCNN, also proposed its modified version and called it Fast RCNN. Fast RCNN
solved almost all the existing problems it had all the positive aspects of RCNN and SPPNET. It was faster
and the accuracy was better than old versions. The reason it got better was it was now not taking 2k regions
again and again, it simple takes the image once and generates an image map from it. From generated image
map, image proposals were taken. Now the main issue was without the proposal Fast RCNN was very fast
however with proposals, it was a bit slow. To solve this issue author shortly proposed Faster RCNN. The
Figure 3 briefly describes the structure of Fast RCNN taken from [8].

Figure 3. Fast RCNN Structure [8]

Faster RCNN
Faster RCNN solved the existing problems and increased the speed and efficiency. This model was different
from last approaches, In RCNN and Fast RCNN, a selective algorithm was used, which was really time

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021 | 63

consuming. Selective algorithm was used to look for regions. However, in this new model of Fast RCNN,
another network did the process of selection. Just like old system, image was taken, image map is generated
from image but instead of using selective algorithm another network selects the regions and other processes
remain same. This approach was fast and accurate and can even be used for real time object detection. The
Figure 4 briefly describes the structure of Faster RCNN taken from [9]. Many other models like Mask
RCNN [26] were also proposed in this time period.

Figure 4. Faster RCNN Structure [9]

Feature pyramid Networks

This model was proposed in 2017 and works on the model of Faster RCNN. The issue before this model
was most of the work was done on the top layer but after this model deep detection was done on deep layers
and this also made easier to recognize different categories. Moreover, Convolutional Neural Network
(CNN) already works on the basis of layers in forward pass so using Feature pyramid Networks (FPN)
provides the advantage. After the Faster RCNN, FPN became the base of many new detectors and models.
Since then FPN is used in different detection models with slight changes for improvement [27]. Figure 5
briefly describes the structure of the Feature pyramid Network taken from [28]. Many single shot detectors
are also used based on FPN for some time [29]. Deep feature pyramid networks were also used for object
detection [30].

Figure 5. Feature pyramid Network Structure

YOLO MODELS
YOLO stands for you only look once and that is the main concept behind it. Idea is to make this system so
perfect that it can detect the objects in just one go. YOLO is a whole system for object detection that is used

64 | Scientific Journal of Informatics , Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021

in different researches for few last years to accomplish tasks. YOLO is customized as needed to get the best
results possible. YOLO came out in 2016 and is used for different researches. After the YOLO it also got
updated to YOLO-v2 and YOLO-v3. YOLO is constantly used in general object detection with
customization. Paper [31] provides techniques for fast and accurate object detection. High-resolution data
is downscaled and divided into parts for detection. Only specific areas in original image are focused on.
This saves data loss and helps in efficient data detection. Many other Yolo models are proposed for efficient
object detection by modification in YOLO. [32] Proposed a Yolo-lite model to be used on portable devices
without any need of GPU. The goal is to get the accuracy of 30 using data sets of PASCAL VOC. Model
is first trained on PASCAL VOC and then on coco datasets to achieve maximum accuracy and a table is
provided which shows the comparison between different Yolo models.

YOLO v1
Yolo is fast in case of object detection. The detection speed in real-time goes up to 45 fps in normal cases.
Speed of 155 fps can be achieved with fast Yolo. Yolo only looks once and detects objects. It creates S x S
(7 x 7) grid on input and creates bounding boxes and does call probability mapping to check probability of
detecting of an object in grid cells. Every grid cell finds bounding boxes (b where b=2) and confidence for
those boxes. Bounding boxes are generated and they consist of five predictions including x-axis, y-axis,
height, width, and confidence scores. Class probabilities are also found to detect the probability of detecting
the object. According to the structure model, Yolo model consists of 24 convolutional layers and two fully
connected layers.

Figure 6. Yolo v1 Structure [10].

Different other models are proposed after modification in Yolo. Fast Yolo consists of less number of
convolution layers (9). Input image only passes once from the network and the object is detected. Figure 6
briefly describes the structure of Yolo v1 taken from [10]. Loss function clearly describes different parts of
algorithms and how they are contributing towards the betterment of algorithm as shown in Figure 7 below.

Figure 7. Loss Function (yolov1).

The activation function used in Yolo v1 is leaky relu.

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021 | 65

YOLO v2
Yolov2 is improved version of Yolo; the main goal was to increase accuracy with speed [33]. Bounding
boxes are more diverse and accuracy is higher. In yolo v1 had less bounding boxes and boxes were guessed
arbitrarily. According to the structure, fully connected layers are removed. Predictions are moved from cell
level to boundary level. Yolo v2 outperformed Yolo v1 with the new improvements and produce better
results than many other models. The Figure 8 briefly describes the structure of Yolo v2 taken from [34].

Figure 8. Yolo v2 Structure [33].

This model was later improved in Yolo v3. The structure clearly describes all the layers. The convolutional
layers are shown with the max-pooling and complete information about the filter and outputs.

YOLO v3
Better than Yolo v2 on accuracy but slower due to complex, structure. The main difference between yolov2
and yolov3 is that yolov3 uses logistic functions to find an object, unlike yolov2 where probability is
checked [34]. Figure 9 briefly describes the structure of Yolo v3 taken from [34].

Figure 9. Yolo v3 Structure.

SSD
After different versions of Yolo, Single Shot Multibox Detector (SSD) was proposed [35]. This model is
used as an alternative with Yolo for a long time. SSD is good as compared to basic Yolo v1 but when it
comes to Yolo v3, SSD sometimes does not perform as well as Yolo v3. Like other models, SSD also passes
input images through different layers of convolutional neural network. Different bounding boxes are
generated on different scales. Hence results in better accuracy and performance. Figure 10 demonstrates
the difference between structures of Yolo and SSD taken from [35]. The structures clearly describe the
concept of fully connected and partially connected layers. SSD challenges Yolo and outperforms Yolo.

66 | Scientific Journal of Informatics , Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021

After the SSD many other detection models and techniques like Ratina Net [36] are proposed which are
used sometimes by researchers for specific tasks. However, for general detection, Yolo and SSD are still
used on a large scale. Many variants of SDD with different customization are also used. Feature Fusion
Single Shot Detection (FSSD) is also used by many researchers [37]. Many other variants were proposed
for fast detection on different datasets [38]. There are many future object detection advancements with
combined models of SSD and other Yolo models with two-stage detectors.

Figure 10. Difference between YOLO & SSD

Yolo alterations
In computer vision, object detection is a fundamental challenge. Object detection is used in every field like
image processing, pattern recognition, machine learning, etc. Authors in paper [33], proposed an attention
pipeline. In this attention pipeline, two things are covered. One is to downscale images and 2nd is cropping
the real image into parts and matching both images in a way to only check the focused parts of image termed
this concept as attention. The model first downscales the original image and then in low-resolution image
only focuses on specific parts after looking at the real image and highlighting objects. Further research
based on a paper [33], in which a YOLO lite model is proposed. [32][41] A YOLO lite model is proposed
that is used on portable devices without any need for GPU. The goal is to get the accuracy of 30 using data
sets of PASCAL VOC. Model is first trained on PASCAL VOC and then on coco datasets to achieve
maximum accuracy and a table is provided which shows the comparison. Hun Yang and Rui Li proposed
an improved YOLOv2 in their paper [39][42]. The proposed approach solves the problem of large
parameters of convolution layers. This paper introduced a Depth-wise Separable Convolution. It reduces
the number of parameters and enhances the speed of YOLOv2 detection model. The problem in detection
of small object is resolved through this paper.

YOLOv2 uses a feature fusion method that weakens the performance of YOLOv2. In this proposed
improved YOLOv2, the feature fusion method is replaced with Feature Pyramid Network. It can detect
objects with different sizes to improve detector precision. The recognition accuracy became sensitive to
detect smaller objects. It has higher accuracy for detecting small objects. An improved YOLOv2 is faster
and detects smaller objects. The parameters of convolution layers are reduced by 78.83%. However, it is
more complex than YOLOv2. It is complex to detect smaller objects, especially in complex scenarios. An
improved structure is proposed [40][43], in which smaller objects are detected and accurately recognized.
It reduced the complexity of the YOLOv2 model. To improve the detection accuracy 1 x 1 convolution
layer is proposed and the output size is changed to extract more features from multi pixels images. To adapt
the size of objects, the loss function is adapted in this model. Paper [41] proposed an object detection
method based on lightweight network architecture. The proposed model consists of a detector, which
consists of a single-stage network model based on YOLOv2 architecture. By reducing number of channels
in each convolutional layer makes it lightweight. This network is also embedded with extended path through
layer, which helps to detect smaller objects more easily. In this paper [42], a lightweight YOLOv2 is
proposed which consists of binarized CNN and parallel support vector regression for object feature
detection. For object feature detection, binarized CNN is used and parallel Support Vector Regression
(SVR) is used for localization and classification. SVR is based on Support Vector Machine (SVM) [43],

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021 | 67

which is a supervised learning model that is used for analyzing data for regression and classification
analysis. Yolo with deep learning models is also used as needed with customizations [44].

Task Based Detection

Task-based object detection is grouped separately from general object detection but they are not much
different from general detection. In fact, general object detection is used as the base, and with modifications;
it is used for a specific task. The main examples of task-based detection include face detection, pedestrian
detection, text detection, traffic signals, and traffic light detection. Task-based detection takes the modern
algorithms and techniques and uses them with new focused approach to accomplish a task with maximum
accuracy.

Experiments
The experiments are taken on Intel Core i5 7200U CPU, 2.50 GHz, and Windows 10. The dataset is COCO
dataset. It is an excellent large dataset designed to detect objects with 120,000 images, in which 80,000
images are training images and the rest images are validation images. The table shows the models and their
accuracy against different objects. Darknet repository is used to implement YOLO. Darknet is a framework
of Neural Network (NN) written in CUDA and C language.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The results show that the YOLOv3 model performs better than other object detection models. SSD
sometimes performs well and sometimes not performs as well as other models are performing. SSD
challenges YOLO. However, YOLOv1 is better than SSD but this model is slow. The mean Average
Precision (mAP) of SSD is 41.6% whereas the mAP of YOLOv1 model is 58.1%. YOLOv2 is a better
version of YOLOv1. It predicts objects accurately and faster than YOLOv1. The mAP of YOLOv2 is
62.5%. YOLOv3 is a better version of the object detection model than other versions of YOLO. It always
predicts objects accurately above 50%. The mAP of YOLOv3 model is 82%. However, this model is more
complex and takes more computational powers and resources than other detection models. Figure 11 briefly
describes comparison of models.

Figure 11. Comparison of Models

Table 1 and Table 2 clearly describe the accuracy and finishing time for object detection. This comparison
of models clearly shows the difference in results provided by each model for different objects.

Table 1. Accuracy Comparison of Models

Models Bicycle Dog Cellphone Cat Bottle Bird Stop- Person Laptop Chair
sign
SSD 0.47 0.51 0.45 0.35 0.30 0.32 0.52 0.45 0.48 0.36
YOLOv1 0.93 0.38 0.35 0.82 0.40 0.70 0.37 0.67 0.35 0.98
YOLOv2 0.68 0.64 0.70 0.64 0.34 0.75 0.54 0.63 0.71 0.71
YOLOv3 0.89 0.97 0.72 0.81 0.73 0.98 0.79 0.99 0.73 0.79

68 | Scientific Journal of Informatics , Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021

 Table 2. Finishing time taken by Models
Models Bicycle Dog Cellphone Cat Bottle Bird Stop- Person Laptop Chair
sign
SSD 0.121 0.121 0.143 0.125 0.171 0.121 0.121 0.181 0.121 0.131
YOLOv1 0.13 0.11 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.1 0.11 0.11 0.101 0.1
YOLOv2 0.124 0.112 0.125 0.134 0.143 0.114 0.122 0.129 0.112 0.114
YOLOv3 1.25 1.29 1.251 1.251 1.22 1.22 1.513 1.175 1.176 1.345

CONCLUSION
Object detection is advancing on a rapid level especially after 2012 and it holds much potential after 2020.
All the models from 2012 to 2020 made object detection faster and accurate and there is no stopping in the
improved accuracy and speed. New datasets are made for specific tasks to detect better and faster.
Especially after 5g future holds much potential for improvement in different models in terms of speed and
accuracy. Real-time object detection is facing most of the issues in 2020. However, after 5g the speed and
accuracy of models may increase by 5 to 10 folds. This study have many issues related to task-based
detections as researchers are always focused on general object detection rather than a specific task.
However, as the general object detection improved, task-based detection also improves accordingly.
Different fields like Computer vision already improved much after advancements of object detection and
as it the object detection improves more these fields will have a promising future. Task-based object
detection has so much potential when it comes to real-life applications. Many new models are proposed
especially in the last 3 to 5 years and this paper may see different new models joined with old models to
achieve high accuracy and speed in the future.

REFERENCES
[1] R. Szeliski, Computer vision: algorithms and applications. Springer, 2010.
[2] R. Sathya and A. Abraham, “Comparison of Supervised and Unsupervised Learning Algorithms for Pattern
Classification,” Int. J. Adv. Res. Artif. Intell., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 34–38, 2013.
[3] L. Chen, J. Hoey, C. D. Nugent, D. J. Cook, and Z. Yu, “Sensor-based activity recognition,” IEEE Trans. Syst.
Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev., vol. 42, no. 6, pp. 790–808, 2012.
[4] Q. You, H. Jin, Z. Wang, C. Fang, and J. Luo, “Image captioning with semantic attention,” Proc. IEEE
Comput. Soc. Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit., pp. 4651–4659, 2016.
[5] F. Ahmad, A. Najam, and Z. Ahmed, “Image-based Face Detection and Recognition: ‘State of the Art,’” Proc.
IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. pattern Recognit., pp. 3–6, 2013.
[6] M. Mehta, C. Goyal, M. C. Srivastava, and R. C. Jain, “Real time object detection and tracking: Histogram
matching and Kalman filter approach,” 2010 2nd Int. Conf. Comput. Autom. Eng. ICCAE 2010, vol. 5, pp.
796–801, 2010.
[7] R. Girshick, J. Donahue, T. Darrell, and J. Malik, “Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and
semantic segmentation,” Proc. IEEE Comput. Soc. Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit., pp. 580–587, 2014.
[8] R. Girshick, “Fast R-CNN,” Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., pp. 1440–1448, 2015.
[9] S. Ren, K. He, R. Girshick, and J. Sun, “Faster R-CNN: Towards Real-Time Object Detection with Region
Proposal Networks,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1137–1149, 2017.
[10] J. Redmon, S. Divvala, R. Girshick, and A. Farhadi, “You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection,”
Proc. IEEE Comput. Soc. Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit., pp. 779–788, 2016.
[11] Z. Li, C. Peng, G. Yu, X. Zhang, Y. Deng, and J. Sun, “Light-head R-CNN: In defense of two-stage object
detector,” arXiv, pp. 1–9, 2017.
[12] M. Najibi, P. Samangouei, R. Chellappa, and L. S. Davis, “SSH: Single Stage Headless Face Detector,” Proc.
IEEE Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., pp. 4885–4894, 2017.
[13] J. G. Andrews et al., “What will 5G be?,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1065–1082, 2014.
[14] N. Dvornik, J. Mairal, and C. Schmid, “Modeling visual context is key to augmenting object detection
datasets,” Proc. Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis., pp. 364–380, 2018.
[15] T. Yi-Lin et al., “Microsoft COCO,” Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis., pp. 740–755, 2014.
[16] Y. Xiang, R. Mottaghi, and S. Savarese, “Beyond PASCAL: A benchmark for 3D object detection in the wild,”
IEEE Winter Conf. Appl. Comput. Vis., pp. 75–82, 2014.
[17] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton, “ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural
Networks Alex,” Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., pp. 1097–1105, 2012.
[18] A. Kuznetsova et al., “The Open Images Dataset V4: Unified Image Classification, Object Detection, and
Visual Relationship Detection at Scale,” Int. J. Comput. Vis., vol. 128, no. 7, pp. 1956–1981, 2020.
[19] K. Choi and J. Yun, “Robust and Fast Moving Object Detection in A Non-Stationary Camera Via Foreground
Probability Based Sampling,” IEEE Int. Conf. Image Process., pp. 4897–4901, 2015.
[20] H. J. Yoo, “Deep Convolution Neural Networks in Computer Vision: a Review,” IEIE Trans. Smart Process.
Comput., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 35–43, 2015.

Scientific Journal of Informatics, Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021 | 69

[21] O. Russakovsky et al., “ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge,” Int. J. Comput. Vis., vol. 115,
no. 3, pp. 211–252, 2015.
[22] J. Dai, Y. Li, K. He, and J. Sun, “R-fcn: Object detection via region-based fully convolutional networks,” Adv.
Neural Inf. Process. Syst., pp. 379–387, 2016.
[23] K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Spatial Pyramid Pooling in Deep Convolutional Networks for Visual
Recognition,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 1904–1916, 2015.
[24] E. Jahani Heravi, H. Habibi Aghdam, and D. Puig, “An optimized convolutional neural network with
bottleneck and spatial pyramid pooling layers for classification of foods,” Pattern Recognit. Lett., vol. 105,
pp. 50–58, 2018.
[25] H. Li, P. Xiong, J. An, and L. Wang, “Dynamic attention network for semantic segmentation,”
Neurocomputing, vol. 384, pp. 182–191, 2018.
[26] K. He, G. Gkioxari, P. Dollár, and R. Girshick, “Mask R-CNN,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol.
42, no. 2, pp. 386–397, 2020.
[27] W. S. Lai, J. Bin Huang, N. Ahuja, and M. H. Yang, “Deep laplacian pyramid networks for fast and accurate
super-resolution,” Proc. - 30th IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2017, vol. 2017-January,
pp. 5835–5843, 2017.
[28] T. Y. Lin, P. Dollár, R. Girshick, K. He, B. Hariharan, and S. Belongie, “Feature pyramid networks for object
detection,” Proc. - 30th IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2017, vol. 2017-January, pp.
936–944, 2017.
[29] Q. Zhao et al., “M2Det: A single-shot object detector based on multi-level feature pyramid network,” Thirty-
Third AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell., 2018.
[30] T. Kong, F. Sun, W. Huang, and H. Liu, “Deep Feature Pyramid Reconfiguration for Object Detection,” Eur.
Conf. Comput. Vis., vol. 1, pp. 172–188, 2018.
[31] V. Ruzicka and F. Franchetti, “Fast and accurate object detection in high resolution 4K and 8K video using
GPUs,” IEEE High Perform. Extrem. Comput. Conf., 2018.
[32] R. Huang, J. Pedoeem, and C. Chen, “YOLO-LITE: A Real-Time object detection algorithm optimized for
non-GPU computers,” IEEE Int. Conf. Big Data, pp. 2503–2510, 2018.
[33] J. Redmon and A. Farhadi, “YOLO9000: Better, faster, stronger,” Proc. - 30th IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis.
Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2017, vol. 2017-January, pp. 6517–6525, 2017.
[34] J. Redmon and A. Farhadi, “YOLO v.3,” arXiv:1804.02767, pp. 1–6, 2018.
[35] W. Liu, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, and C. Szegedy, “SSD: Single Shot MultiBox Detector,” Eur. Conf. Comput.
Vis., vol. 1, pp. 21–37, 2016.
[36] W. Khan, N. Zaki, and L. Ali, “Intelligent Pneumonia Identification from Chest X-Rays: A Systematic
Literature Review,” medRxiv, 2020.
[37] Z. X. Li and F. Q. Zhou, “FSSD: Feature fusion single shot multibox detector,” arXiv:1712.00960, 2017.
[38] L. Zheng, C. Fu, and Y. Zhao, “Extend the shallow part of single shot MultiBox detector via convolutional
neural network,” arXiv:1801.05918, 2018.
[39] R. Li and J. Yang, “Improved YOLOv2 Object Detection Model,” Int. Conf. Multimed. Comput. Syst. -
Proceedings, vol. 2018-May, pp. 1–6, 2018.
[40] E. Dong, Y. Zhu, Y. Ji, and S. Du, “An improved convolution neural network for object detection using
Yolov2,” IEEE Int. Conf. Mechatronics Autom., pp. 1184–1188, 2018.
[41] Y. C. Lim and M. Kang, “Object Detection Using a Single Extended Feature Map,” IEEE Intell. Veh. Symp.
Proc., vol. 2018-June, no. Iv, pp. 820–825, 2018.
[42] H. Nakahara, Y. Haruyoshi, T. Fujii, and S. Sato, “A Lightweight YOLOv2: A Binarized CNN with A Parallel
Support Vector Regression for an FPGA,” in Proc. 2018 ACM/SIGDA Int. Symp. Field-Program. Gate Arrays,
2018, pp. 31–40.
[43] B. Schölkopf and A. J. Smola, Learning With Kernels: Support Vector Machines, Regularization,
Optimization, and Beyond. The MIT Press, 2018.
[44] W. Hammedi, M. Ramirez-Martinez, P. Brunet, and S.-M. Senouci, “Deep Learning-Based Real-Time Object
Detection in Inland Navigation,” IEEE Glob. Commun. Conf., pp. 1–6, 2019.

70 | Scientific Journal of Informatics , Vol. 8, No. 1, May 2021