TransCues: Boundary and Reflection-empowered Pyramid Vision Transformer for Semantic Transparent Object Segmentation
Tuan-Anh Vu, Nguyen Truong Hai, Ziqiang Zheng, Binh-Son Hua, Qing Guo, Ivor Tsang, Sai-Kit Yeung
OpenReview ground truth
TL;DR — We present a novel pyramidal transformer architecture with two object cues which significantly advanced semantic transparent object segmentation and demonstrated remarkable performance across a variety of benchmark datasets
Abstract
Although glass is a prevalent material in everyday life, most semantic segmentation methods struggle to distinguish it from opaque materials. We propose $\textbf{TransCues}$, a pyramidal transformer encoder-decoder architecture to segment transparent objects from a color image. To distinguish between glass and non-glass regions, our transformer architecture is based on two important visual cues that involve boundary and reflection feature learning, respectively. We implement this idea by introducing a Boundary Feature Enhancement (BFE) module paired with a boundary loss and a Reflection Feature Enhancement (RFE) module that decomposes reflections into foreground and background layers. We empirically show that these two modules can be used together effectively, leading to improved overall performance on various benchmark datasets. In addition to binary segmentation of glass and mirror objects, we further demonstrate that our method works well for generic semantic segmentation for both glass and non-glass labels. Our method outperforms the state-of-the-art methods by a large margin on diverse datasets, achieving $\textbf{+4.2}$\% mIoU on Trans10K-v2, $\textbf{+5.6}$\% mIoU on MSD, $\textbf{+10.1}$\% mIoU on RGBD-Mirror, $\textbf{+13.1}$\% mIoU on TROSD, and $\textbf{+8.3}$\% mIoU on Stanford2D3D, demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of our method.
Author context
Most prolific author: 11 submissions (credibility 0.97).
No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).
Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.
Ranking trajectory
Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.
Battle history — 38 comparisons
Ranked above opponent in 57% of matchups.
- ▲ beat Offline Imitation Learning without Auxilia… ×6
- ▲ beat Musketeer: Joint Training/Inference for Mu… ×4
- ▼ lost to PF-LRM: Pose-Free Large Reconstruction Mod… ×4
- ▼ lost to Detect Every Thing with Few Examples ×4
- ▲ beat CAT-Seg: Cost Aggregation for Open-vocabul… ×4
Judge assessments
Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 38)