PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

Strategic Preys Make Acute Predators: Enhancing Camouflaged Object Detectors by Generating Camouflaged Objects

Chunming He, Kai Li, Yachao Zhang, Yulun Zhang, Chenyu You, Zhenhua Guo, Xiu Li, Martin Danelljan, Fisher Yu

representation learningcamouflaged object detectionadversarial trainingimage segmentation
56.80100
Fused
band ≈ ±14 pct pts (from σ = 0.27)
64.80100
Mimo
band ≈ ±19 pct pts (from σ = 0.38)
41.00100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±20 pct pts (from σ = 0.39)

OpenReview ground truth

Accepted

Abstract

Camouflaged object detection (COD) is the challenging task of identifying camouflaged objects visually blended into surroundings. Albeit achieving remarkable success, existing COD detectors still struggle to obtain precise results in some challenging cases. To handle this problem, we draw inspiration from the prey-vs-predator game that leads preys to develop better camouflage and predators to acquire more acute vision systems and develop algorithms from both the prey side and the predator side. On the prey side, we propose an adversarial training framework, Camouflageator, which introduces an auxiliary generator to generate more camouflaged objects that are harder for a COD method to detect. Camouflageator trains the generator and detector in an adversarial way such that the enhanced auxiliary generator helps produce a stronger detector. On the predator side, we introduce a novel COD method, called Internal Coherence and Edge Guidance (ICEG), which introduces a camouflaged feature coherence module to excavate the internal coherence of camouflaged objects, striving to obtain more complete segmentation results. Additionally, ICEG proposes a novel edge-guided separated calibration module to remove false predictions to avoid obtaining ambiguous boundaries. Extensive experiments show that ICEG outperforms existing COD detectors and Camouflageator is flexible to improve various COD detectors, including ICEG, which brings state-of-the-art COD performance.

Author context

Most prolific author: 7 submissions (credibility 1.00).

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 48% of matchups.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 38)