Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
167 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Modeling Weather Uncertainty for Multi-weather Co-Presence Estimation (2403.20092v1)

Published 29 Mar 2024 in cs.CV

Abstract: Images from outdoor scenes may be taken under various weather conditions. It is well studied that weather impacts the performance of computer vision algorithms and needs to be handled properly. However, existing algorithms model weather condition as a discrete status and estimate it using multi-label classification. The fact is that, physically, specifically in meteorology, weather are modeled as a continuous and transitional status. Instead of directly implementing hard classification as existing multi-weather classification methods do, we consider the physical formulation of multi-weather conditions and model the impact of physical-related parameter on learning from the image appearance. In this paper, we start with solid revisit of the physics definition of weather and how it can be described as a continuous machine learning and computer vision task. Namely, we propose to model the weather uncertainty, where the level of probability and co-existence of multiple weather conditions are both considered. A Gaussian mixture model is used to encapsulate the weather uncertainty and a uncertainty-aware multi-weather learning scheme is proposed based on prior-posterior learning. A novel multi-weather co-presence estimation transformer (MeFormer) is proposed. In addition, a new multi-weather co-presence estimation (MePe) dataset, along with 14 fine-grained weather categories and 16,078 samples, is proposed to benchmark both conventional multi-label weather classification task and multi-weather co-presence estimation task. Large scale experiments show that the proposed method achieves state-of-the-art performance and substantial generalization capabilities on both the conventional multi-label weather classification task and the proposed multi-weather co-presence estimation task. Besides, modeling weather uncertainty also benefits adverse-weather semantic segmentation.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (65)
  1. W.-T. Chen, Z.-K. Huang, C.-C. Tsai, H.-H. Yang, J.-J. Ding, and S.-Y. Kuo, “Learning multiple adverse weather removal via two-stage knowledge learning and multi-contrastive regularization: Toward a unified model,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 17 653–17 662.
  2. V. Musat, I. Fursa, P. Newman, F. Cuzzolin, and A. Bradley, “Multi-weather city: Adverse weather stacking for autonomous driving,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision Workshop, 2021, pp. 2906–2915.
  3. C. Sakaridis, D. Dai, and L. Van Gool, “Acdc: The adverse conditions dataset with correspondences for semantic driving scene understanding,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 10 765–10 775.
  4. S. Choi, S. Jung, H. Yun, J. T. Kim, S. Kim, and J. Choo, “Robustnet: Improving domain generalization in urban-scene segmentation via instance selective whitening,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 11 580–11 590.
  5. Q. Bi, S. You, and T. Gevers, “Learning content-enhanced mask transformer for domain generalized urban-scene segmentation,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2024.
  6. C. A. Diaz-Ruiz, Y. Xia, Y. You, J. Nino, J. Chen, J. Monica, X. Chen, K. Luo, Y. Wang, M. Emond et al., “Ithaca365: Dataset and driving perception under repeated and challenging weather conditions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 21 383–21 392.
  7. M. J. Mirza, M. Masana, H. Possegger, and H. Bischof, “An efficient domain-incremental learning approach to drive in all weather conditions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 3001–3011.
  8. Q. Bi, S. You, and T. Gevers, “Interactive learning of intrinsic and extrinsic properties for all-day semantic segmentation,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 32, pp. 3821–3835, 2023.
  9. C. Zhou, M. Teng, Y. Han, C. Xu, and B. Shi, “Learning to dehaze with polarization,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 34, pp. 11 487–11 500, 2021.
  10. Y. Li, S. You, M. S. Brown, and R. T. Tan, “Haze visibility enhancement: A survey and quantitative benchmarking,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, vol. 165, pp. 1–16, 2017.
  11. Y. Liang, S. Anwar, and Y. Liu, “Drt: A lightweight single image deraining recursive transformer,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 589–598.
  12. S. You, R. T. Tan, R. Kawakami, Y. Mukaigawa, and K. Ikeuchi, “Adherent raindrop modeling, detection and removal in video,” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 38, no. 9, pp. 1721–1733, 2015.
  13. D. Dai, C. Sakaridis, S. Hecker, and L. Van Gool, “Curriculum model adaptation with synthetic and real data for semantic foggy scene understanding,” International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 128, pp. 1182–1204, 2020.
  14. X. Ma, Z. Wang, Y. Zhan, Y. Zheng, Z. Wang, D. Dai, and C.-W. Lin, “Both style and fog matter: Cumulative domain adaptation for semantic foggy scene understanding,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 18 922–18 931.
  15. Q. Bi, S. You, and T. Gevers, “Learning generalized segmentation for foggy-scenes by bi-directional wavelet guidance,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2024.
  16. J. Han, H. Liu, H. Zhu, H. Xiong, and D. Dou, “Joint air quality and weather prediction based on multi-adversarial spatiotemporal networks,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 5, 2021, pp. 4081–4089.
  17. D. Lin, C. Lu, H. Huang, and J. Jia, “Rscm: Region selection and concurrency model for multi-class weather recognition,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 26, no. 9, pp. 4154–4167, 2017.
  18. B. Zhao, X. Li, X. Lu, and Z. Wang, “A cnn-rnn architecture for multi-label weather recognition,” Neurocomputing, vol. 322, pp. 47–57, 2018.
  19. K. Xie, Z. Wei, L. Huang, Q. Qin, and W. Zhang, “Graph convolutional networks with attention for multi-label weather recognition,” Neural Computing and Applications, vol. 33, no. 17, pp. 11 107–11 123, 2021.
  20. K. Xie, L. Huang, W. Zhang, Q. Qin, and Z. Wei, “Learning to classify weather conditions from single images without labels,” in International Conference on Multimedia Modeling, 2022, pp. 57–68.
  21. K. Xie, L. Huang, Z. Wei, W. Zhang, and Q. Qin, “Wcatn: Unsupervised deep learning to classify weather conditions from outdoor images,” Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 113, p. 104928, 2022.
  22. J. Zhang and A. Datta, “Some considerations in modeling of moisture transport in heating of hygroscopic materials,” Drying Technology, vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 1983–2008, 2004.
  23. C. Rasmussen, “The infinite gaussian mixture model,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 12, 1999.
  24. A. Kendall and Y. Gal, “What uncertainties do we need in bayesian deep learning for computer vision?” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 30, 2017.
  25. K. Ciosek, V. Fortuin, R. Tomioka, K. Hofmann, and R. Turner, “Conservative uncertainty estimation by fitting prior networks,” in International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020.
  26. A. Malinin and M. Gales, “Predictive uncertainty estimation via prior networks,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2018.
  27. Z. Liu, Y. Lin, Y. Cao, H. Hu, Y. Wei, Z. Zhang, S. Lin, and B. Guo, “Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 10 012–10 022.
  28. K. Sohn, H. Lee, and X. Yan, “Learning structured output representation using deep conditional generative models,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 28, 2015.
  29. Y. Gal and Z. Ghahramani, “Dropout as a bayesian approximation: Representing model uncertainty in deep learning,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Machine Learning, 2016, pp. 1050–1059.
  30. B. Lakshminarayanan, A. Pritzel, and C. Blundell, “Simple and scalable predictive uncertainty estimation using deep ensembles,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017.
  31. U. Sengupta, M. Amos, S. Hosking, C. E. Rasmussen, M. Juniper, and P. Young, “Ensembling geophysical models with bayesian neural networks,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2020, pp. 1205–1217.
  32. A. Foong, D. Burt, Y. Li, and R. Turner, “On the expressiveness of approximate inference in bayesian neural networks,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2020, pp. 15 897–15 908.
  33. A.-K. Kopetzki, B. Charpentier, D. Zugner, S. Giri, and S. Gunnemann, “Evaluating robustness of predictive uncertainty estimation: Are dirichlet-based models reliable?” in International Conference on Machine Learning, 2021, pp. 5707–5718.
  34. Y.-C. Hsu, Y. Shen, H. Jin, and Z. Kira, “Generalized odin: Detecting out-of-distribution image without learning from out-of-distribution data,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2020, pp. 10 951–10 960.
  35. W. Ji, S. Yu, J. Wu, K. Ma, C. Bian, Q. Bi, J. Li, H. Liu, L. Cheng, and Y. Zheng, “Learning calibrated medical image segmentation via multi-rater agreement modeling,” Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 12 341–12 351, 2021.
  36. L. Bertoni, S. Kreiss, and A. Alahi, “Monoloco: Monocular 3d pedestrian localization and uncertainty estimation,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 6861–6871, 2019.
  37. J. Xie, Z. Ma, J.-H. Xue, G. Zhang, J. Sun, Y. Zheng, and J. Guo, “Ds-ui: Dual-supervised mixture of gaussian mixture models for uncertainty inference in image recognition,” IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 30, pp. 9208–9219, 2021.
  38. Y. Lu, X. Ma, L. Yang, T. Zhang, Y. Liu, Q. Chu, J. Yan, and W. Ouyang, “Geometry uncertainty projection network for monocular 3d object detection,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 3111–3121, 2021.
  39. F. Yang, Q. Zhai, X. Li, R. Huang, A. Luo, H. Cheng, and D. Fan, “Uncertainty-guided transformer reasoning for camouflaged object detection,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 4146–4155, 2021.
  40. A. Li, J. Zhang, Y. Lv, B. Liu, T. Zhang, and Y. Dai, “Uncertainty-aware joint salient object and camouflaged object detection,” Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 10 071–10 081, 2021.
  41. D. Guan, J. Huang, A. Xiao, S. Lu, and Y. Cao, “Uncertainty-aware unsupervised domain adaptation in object detection,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, pp. 1–11, 2021.
  42. Y. Wang, J. Peng, and Z. Zhang, “Uncertainty-aware pseudo label refinery for domain adaptive semantic segmentation,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 9092–9101, 2021.
  43. S. Prabhu Teja and F. François, “Uncertainty reduction for model adaptation in semantic segmentation,” Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 9608–9618, 2021.
  44. Q. Zhou, Z. Feng, Q. Gu, G. Cheng, X. Lu, J. Shi, and L. Ma, “Uncertainty-aware consistency regularization for cross-domain semantic segmentation,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, p. 103448, 2022.
  45. J. Peterson, R. Battleday, T. Griffiths, and O. Russakovsky, “Human uncertainty makes classification more robust,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 9617–9626, 2019.
  46. S. Khan, M. Hayat, S. W. Zamir, J. Shen, and L. Shao, “Striking the right balance with uncertainty,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2019, pp. 103–112.
  47. P. Hu, S. Sclaroff, and K. Saenko, “Uncertainty-aware learning for zero-shot semantic segmentation,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 21 713–21 724, 2020.
  48. P. Hall, “On kullback-leibler loss and density estimation,” The Annals of Statistics, pp. 1491–1519, 1987.
  49. P. Ailliot, D. Allard, V. Monbet, and P. Naveau, “Stochastic weather generators: an overview of weather type models,” Journal of the French Statistical Society, vol. 156, no. 1, pp. 101–113, 2015.
  50. K. Piotrowicz and D. Ciaranek, “A selection of weather type classification systems and examples of their application,” Theoretical and Applied Climatology, vol. 140, pp. 719–730, 2020.
  51. C. Lolis and G. Kotsias, “The use of weather types in the definition of seasons: the case of southern balkans,” Theoretical and Applied Climatology, vol. 142, pp. 1199–1219, 2020.
  52. C. Boldeman, R. Bränström, H. Dal, S. Kristjansson, Y. Rodvall, B. Jansson, and H. Ullen, “Tanning habits and sunburn in a swedish population age 13–50 years,” European Journal of Cancer, vol. 37, no. 18, pp. 2441–2448, 2001.
  53. P.-Y. Laffont, Z. Ren, X. Tao, C. Qian, and J. Hays, “Transient attributes for high-level understanding and editing of outdoor scenes,” ACM Transactions on graphics (TOG), vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 1–11, 2014.
  54. S. R. Richter, V. Vineet, S. Roth, and V. Koltun, “Playing for data: Ground truth from computer games,” in European conference on computer vision, 2016, pp. 102–118.
  55. A. R. Sekkat, Y. Dupuis, P. Vasseur, and P. Honeine, “The omniscape dataset,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2020, pp. 1603–1608.
  56. D. S. Wilks and R. L. Wilby, “The weather generation game: a review of stochastic weather models,” Progress in physical geography, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 329–357, 1999.
  57. S. Zhao, G. Ding, Y. Gao, and J. Han, “Learning visual emotion distributions via multi-modal features fusion,” in Proceedings of the 25th ACM international conference on Multimedia, 2017, pp. 369–377.
  58. ——, “Approximating discrete probability distribution of image emotions by multi-modal features fusion,” in Proceedings of the 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2017, pp. 4669–4675.
  59. J. Lanchantin, T. Wang, V. Ordonez, and Y. Qi, “General multi-label image classification with transformers,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 16 478–16 488.
  60. K. Zhu and J. Wu, “Residual attention: A simple but effective method for multi-label recognition,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 184–193.
  61. J. Zhao, K. Yan, Y. Zhao, X. Guo, F. Huang, and J. Li, “Transformer-based dual relation graph for multi-label image recognition,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 163–172.
  62. L.-C. Chen, G. Papandreou, F. Schroff, and H. Adam, “Rethinking atrous convolution for semantic image segmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.05587, 2017.
  63. E. Xie, W. Wang, Z. Yu, A. Anandkumar, J. M. Alvarez, and P. Luo, “Segformer: Simple and efficient design for semantic segmentation with transformers,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 34, pp. 12 077–12 090, 2021.
  64. B. Cheng, A. Schwing, and A. Kirillov, “Per-pixel classification is not all you need for semantic segmentation,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 34, pp. 17 864–17 875, 2021.
  65. J. Wang, K. Sun, T. Cheng, B. Jiang, C. Deng, Y. Zhao, D. Liu, Y. Mu, M. Tan, X. Wang et al., “Deep high-resolution representation learning for visual recognition,” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 43, no. 10, pp. 3349–3364, 2020.
Citations (1)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com