Fig. 1. Structure of AAFCNN model
Fig. 2. Structure of semantic connection path
Fig. 3. Different attention modules. (a) Channel attention module; (b) spatial attention module
Fig. 4. Structure of attention model
Fig. 5. Size distribution of traffic signs in TT100K dataset
Fig. 6. Accuracy-recall curves of traffic signs at three scales. (a) Pixel interval of (0,32); (b) pixel interval of (32,96]; (c) pixel interval of (96,400]
Fig. 7. Part of visual recognition results of AAFCNN model
Method | Backbone | Params /106 | Index | S /% | M /% | L /% |
---|
Faster R-CNN | ResNet-101 | 52.2 | Recall | 72.0 | 91.3 | 91.5 | Precision | 76.1 | 87.5 | 86.1 | F1-score | 74.0 | 89.4 | 88.7 | Faster R-CNN +FPN | ResNet-101 | 60.1 | Recall | 86.6 | 95.5 | 95.1 | Precision | 85.0 | 92.9 | 92.3 | F1-score | 85.8 | 94.2 | 93.7 | Ref. [15] | | 81.2 | Recall | 87.4 | 93.6 | 87.7 | Precision | 81.7 | 90.8 | 90.6 | F1-score | 84.5 | 92.0 | 89.1 | RetinaNet | ResNeXt-101 | 94.7 | Recall | 87.4 | 95.1 | 93.1 | Precision | 84.3 | 95.9 | 94.2 | F1-score | 85.8 | 95.5 | 93.6 | FCOS | ResNeXt-101 | 89.7 | Recall | 88.7 | 95.6 | 92.4 | Precision | 85.6 | 96.4 | 93.5 | F1-score | 86.8 | 96.0 | 93.0 | CenterNet | HourglassNet | 191.3 | Recall | 89.7 | 96.0 | 92.4 | Precision | 90.1 | 96.7 | 94.9 | F1-score | 89.9 | 96.3 | 93.6 | AAFCNN | DenseNet-121 | 48.1 | Recall | 90.6 | 95.6 | 93.1 | Precision | 91.2 | 97.3 | 96.8 | F1-score | 90.9 | 96.4 | 94.9 |
|
Table 1. Performance comparison of different traffic sign recognition methods
Backbone | Params /106 | AP /% |
---|
S | M | L |
---|
DenseNet-121 | 48.1 | 63.4 | 80.1 | 86.1 | DenseNet-169 | 65.4 | 62.5 | 79.9 | 86.1 | DenseNet-201 | 101.4 | 61.7 | 79.7 | 85.7 | DenseNet-264 | 154.8 | 61.9 | 80.0 | 85.0 |
|
Table 2. Effect of depth of densely connected network on recognition performance
Location | Params /106 | AP /% |
---|
S | M | L |
---|
In coding path | 48.1 | 63.4 | 80.1 | 86.1 | In decoding path | 47.8 | 62.1 | 80.0 | 85.8 | Both coding path and decoding path | 48.2 | 62.6 | 80.0 | 85.1 |
|
Table 3. Effect of location of attention model on recognition performance
Model | Params /106 | AP /% |
---|
S | M | L |
---|
Base | 14.1 | 60.8 | 79.7 | 85.9 | Base+AM | 14.2 | 61.7 | 79.8 | 85.1 | Base+SCP | 47.8 | 61.9 | 80.0 | 87.2 | Base+AM+SCP | 48.1 | 63.4 | 80.1 | 86.1 |
|
Table 4. Performance comparison of each module