Systems and methods for cross-modal knowledge transfer without task-relevant source data

Abstract

A cross-modal knowledge transfer system is provided for adapting one or more source model networks to one or more target model networks. The system includes steps of providing a TI pair dataset through a source feature encoder of one or more source model networks, extracting TI source features and TI source moments from the TI pair data by a BN layer of one or more source model networks, providing the TI pair dataset and an unlabeled TR dataset through one or more target model networks to extract TI target features and TR target moments, jointly training all feature encoders of one or more target model networks by matching the extracted TI target features and TR target moments with the TI source features and TI source moments along with mixing weights, and forming a final target model network by combining the trained one or more target model networks and is configured to execute.

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a system and method for cross-modal knowledge transfer without using task-relevant source data. [Background technology]

[0002] Cross-modal knowledge distillation (CMKD) methods aim to learn rich representations in one modality, which does not have a large amount of labeled data, from a large labeled dataset in another modality. These methods have been used for various practical computer vision tasks, such as action recognition and image recognition. Most of the research along this line is based on the assumption that task-relevant paired data across different modalities is accessible. Recent research has relaxed this assumption in the sense of domain generalization, where task-relevant paired data in the target domain is inaccessible but task-relevant paired data in the source domain is accessible. As an example, these methods consider cross-domain uniform database access (UDA), where the target domain has unlabeled RGB-D pairs instead of a single modality. All of these studies either utilize task-relevant paired data for cross-modal knowledge transfer or consider cross-modal paired data as a domain. There is also research on zero-shot domain adaptation, which utilizes external task-irrelevant paired data but requires access to the source data. To address memory or privacy issues related to source data, a new line of research, named Hypothesis Transfer Learning (HTL), has recently emerged, where instead of source data, only a trained source model is accessible. In this context, people have explored target domain data adaptation with limited or no labels in the presence of both single-source, i.e., Source-Free Domain Adaptation (SFDA), or multi-source models, i.e., Multiple Source-Free Domain Adaptation (MSFDA). The above methods do not perform well in regimes where the unlabeled target set comes from a different modality than the source.There is a need for novel cross-modal knowledge transfer methods that consider different source and target modalities and can perform effective knowledge transfer without access to the task-relevant data used to train the source models. Summary of the Invention

[0003] The present disclosure relates to systems and methods for cross-modal knowledge transfer systems and methods that do not use task-relevant source data.

[0004] Some embodiments of the present invention demonstrate that cost-effective depth and infrared sensors are now being implemented as alternatives to conventional RGB sensors, and their advantages over RGB in areas such as autonomous navigation and remote sensing are clearly understood. Therefore, building computer vision and deep learning systems for depth and infrared data is crucial. However, large labeled datasets for these modalities are still lacking. In such cases, transferring knowledge from a neural network trained on a large, well-labeled dataset in the source modality (RGB) to a neural network operating on the target modality (depth, infrared, etc.) is highly valuable. Due to memory and privacy constraints, access to the source data may be unavailable, and knowledge transfer must operate solely on the source model. We describe SOCKET: Source-Free Cross-Modal Knowledge Transfer, an effective solution to this challenging task of transferring knowledge from one source modality to a different target modality without access to the source data. The framework reduces the modality gap by using paired, task-irrelevant data and matching the mean and variance of target features with batch normalization statistics present in the source model. Through extensive experiments, we demonstrate that our method outperforms existing source-free methods (in some cases by up to 12%) for classification tasks that do not consider the modality gap.

[0005] According to some embodiments of the present invention, a cross-modality knowledge transfer system for adapting one or more source model networks to one or more target model networks is provided. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system may include a memory configured to store a task-irrelevant (TI) pair dataset, an unlabeled task-related (TR) dataset, one or more source model networks including a batch normalization (BN) layer, a feature encoder, a convolutional neural network (CNN) layer, and a classifier, one or more target model networks including the BN layer, the feature encoder, the CNN layer, and the classifier, a computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method having instructions, and at least one processor configured to perform steps of the computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method in accordance with the instructions. The steps include extracting TI source features and TR source moments from the one or more source model networks by sending the TI source pair dataset through the one or more source model networks, wherein the CNN layers and classifiers of the one or more source model networks are frozen. The steps further include extracting batches of TI target features and TR target moments from the one or more target model networks by sending the TI paired dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset through the one or more target model networks, wherein the classifiers of the one or more target model networks are frozen. The steps further include calculating a modality-independent loss function based on the extracted TR target features of the one or more target model networks, jointly training feature encoders of the one or more target model networks by minimizing the calculated modality-independent loss function, and generating a final target model network by combining the trained one or more target model networks.

[0006] Some embodiments of the present invention further provide a computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method having instructions, the cross-modality knowledge transfer method using at least one processor and at least one memory, including: extracting TI source features and TR source moments from one or more source model networks by sending TI source pair datasets through one or more source model networks, wherein CNN layers and classifiers of the one or more source model networks are frozen; extracting batches of TI target features and TR target moments from one or more target model networks by sending TI pair datasets and unlabeled TR datasets through one or more target model networks, wherein classifiers of the one or more target model networks are frozen; calculating a modality-independent loss function for the one or more target model networks based on the extracted TR target features; jointly training feature encoders of the one or more target model networks together with mixture weights by minimizing the calculated modality-independent loss function; and generating a final target model network by combining the trained one or more target model networks.

[0007] The accompanying drawings, which are included to provide a further understanding of the invention, illustrate embodiments of the invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0008] [Figure 1] 1 shows a schematic diagram illustrating the SOCKET method according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 2] FIG. 1 illustrates the difference between the problem formulation used in the prior art and SOCKET. [Figure 3] FIG. 1 illustrates a detailed SOCKET procedure according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 4]FIG. 1 shows a complete description of the SOCKET method in algorithmic form according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 5] FIG. 1 illustrates key features of the dataset used in the experiments, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 6] FIG. 10 illustrates results on the SUN RGB-D dataset for a single-source cross-modality knowledge transfer task from RGB to depth modality without access to task-relevant source data for all pairs of domains, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 illustrates results on the SUN RGB-D dataset for a multi-source cross-modality knowledge transfer task from RGB to depth modality without access to task-relevant source data, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 illustrates results on the DIML dataset when a different, task-irrelevant dataset is used in comparison with unadapted sources and SHOT, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 9] FIG. 10 illustrates results on the RGB-NIR dataset for a single-source cross-modal knowledge transfer task from RGB to NIR and vice versa without using task-relevant source data, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 10] FIG. 10 illustrates the difference between cross-modal and cross-domain knowledge transfer results for SUN RGB-D scene classification using SHOT, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 11] FIG. 10 illustrates the contribution to the results of our proposed novel loss component, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 12A] FIG. 10 illustrates the effect of the number of TI data on SOCKET results according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 12B] FIG. 10 illustrates the effect of regularization hyperparameters on SOCKET results, according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 13] FIG. 1 illustrates a cross-modality knowledge transfer system according to some embodiments of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0009] Various embodiments of the present invention will now be described with reference to the drawings. It should be noted that the drawings are not drawn to scale, and that elements of similar structure or function are represented by similar reference numerals throughout the drawings. It should also be noted that the drawings are intended only to facilitate the description of specific embodiments of the present invention. They are not intended to be an exhaustive description of the present invention or to limit the scope of the present invention. In addition, aspects described in connection with a specific embodiment of the present invention are not necessarily limited to that embodiment, but may be practiced in any other embodiment of the present invention.

[0010] Figure 1 shows a schematic diagram illustrating the Source-free Cross-modal Knowledge Transfer (SOCKET) method according to some embodiments of the present invention. We describe the problem of single / multi-source cross-modality knowledge transfer without using data to train source models. To effectively perform knowledge transfer, we minimize the modality gap by aligning cross-modal features for task-irrelevant paired data in feature space and matching the distribution of unlabeled task-relevant features and source features.

[0011] Figure 2 shows related studies and compares them with SOCKET. In this figure, we compare our study with existing problem settings in the literature on knowledge transfer across different domains and modalities. The comparative settings described in this figure are (1) Unsupervised Domain Adaptation (UDA), Domain Translation (DT), (2) Multi-source Domain Adaptation (MSDA), (3) Source-free Single-source Dynamic Analysis (SFDA), (4) Source-free Multi-source Dynamic Analysis (MSFDA), (5) Cross-modal Knowledge Distillation (CMKD), and (6) Zero-shot Dynamic Analysis (ZDDA). Note that only our system enables cross-modal knowledge transfer from multiple sources without any access to associated source training data for unlabeled target datasets of different modalities.

[0012] FIG. 3 illustrates source models 1-n (program modules 1-n) formed by one or more neural networks based on a cross-modality knowledge transfer system 1100 (shown in FIG. 13). For example, a source model 310 includes a convolutional neural network (CNN) layer 311 that outputs an intermediate feature map 312, a batch normalization (BN) layer 313 in a feature encoder 314, and a classification layer (classifier). The output of the feature encoder 315 is sent to a fully connected classifier layer 316. In some cases, a source model (corresponding to a source modality) is referred to as a source model network. Our framework can be divided into two parts: (i) Before knowledge transfer (top): The cross-modality knowledge transfer system activates the BN layer and source feature encoder of the source model, but freezes other parts of the source model, including the CNN and classifier. It then extracts task-irrelevant (TI) source features and source moments by passing task-irrelevant (TI) source data through the activated BN layer and source feature encoder. The term "frozen" means that the parameters in the frozen layer remain fixed and are not updated. Since task-relevant (TR) source feature maps are unavailable, the cross-modality knowledge transfer system extracts the stored moments of their distributions from the BN layer. (ii) During knowledge transfer (bottom): The cross-modality knowledge transfer system freezes only the classification layer (classifier), passes TI and unlabeled TR target data through the target model (corresponding to the target modality), and calculates the mixture weights ζ k to obtain the combined TI target features 324 and TR target moments 322 for each batch from all models, respectively. The target models are sometimes referred to as a target model network.

[0013] The cross-modality knowledge transfer system matches them with pre-extracted source features 321 using a TI feature matching loss 320, and matches (combines) them with source moments 317 using a distribution matching loss 318. Both the TI feature matching loss and the distribution matching loss are modality-specific losses. The TR target features 323 are used to calculate a modality-independent loss (modality-independent loss function) 319. The combination of the modality-specific and modality-independent loss functions is minimized to obtain the mixture weights ζ k We jointly train all feature encoder parameters together with the final target model, which is an optimal linear combination of the updated source models (corresponding to the trained target model network).

[0014] Depth sensors like Kinect and RealSense, LIDAR for directly measuring point clouds, or high-resolution infrared sensors like FLIR allow for expanded application range of computer vision compared to using only visible wavelengths. Direct depth sensing can provide an approximate three-dimensional image of a scene, thereby improving performance in applications like autonomous navigation, while sensing at infrared wavelengths can enable easier pedestrian detection or more advanced object detection in adverse atmospheric conditions like rain, fog, and smoke. These are just a few examples.

[0015] Building computer vision applications using current explicitly supervised deep learning approaches for modalities like depth and infrared requires large amounts of diverse labeled data. However, such large and diverse datasets do not exist for these modalities, and the cost of building such datasets can be prohibitive. In these cases, researchers have developed methods like knowledge distillation to transfer knowledge from models trained on modalities like RGB, where large amounts of labeled data are available, to the target modality like depth.

[0016] Unlike previous work, we address a novel and challenging problem of cross-modal knowledge transfer. We assume that we have access only to (a) a source model trained for a task of interest (TOI) and (b) unlabeled data in the target modality needed to build a model for the same TOI. An important aspect is that our cross-modality knowledge transfer system does not require access to any data in the source modality for the TOI. Such a problem formulation is important in cases where memory and privacy considerations do not allow sharing of training data from the source modality, and only the trained model can be shared.

[0017] Some embodiments provide SOCKET, i.e., source-free cross-modal knowledge transfer, as an effective solution to this problem for bridging the gap between source and target modalities. To do so, we show that (1) the use of an external dataset of source-target modality pairs unrelated to the TOI, called task-irrelevant (TI) data, can help learn an effective target model by bringing the features of the two modalities closer together. In addition to using TI data, we encourage matching the feature statistics of unlabeled target data, defined as task-relevant (TR), with the statistics of source data available from a normalization layer present in the trained source model.

[0018] We provide significant empirical evidence showing that modality shifting from a source modality such as RGB to a target modality such as depth can be much more challenging than domain shifting from one RGB dataset to another. This indicates that the proposed framework is necessary to help minimize the modality gap to make knowledge transfer more effective. Based on the above ideas, we show that it can improve existing prior art methods that were only designed for cross-domain settings in the same modality. The main features of this disclosure are summarized below.

[0019] 1. We formulate a novel problem for knowledge transfer from a model trained for a source modality to a different target modality when there is no access to any task-relevant source data and the target data is unlabeled.

[0020] 2. To bridge the gap between modalities, we propose SOCKET as a novel framework for cross-modal knowledge transfer without access to the source data by (a) using external, task-irrelevant paired datasets and (b) matching moments obtained from a normalization layer in the source model with moments computed on unlabeled target data.

[0021] 3. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets, for both RGB-to-depth and RGB-to-IR knowledge transfer, and for both single-source and multi-source cases, show that SOCKET is useful for reducing the modality gap in feature space, resulting in significantly better performance (in some cases as much as 12% improvement) than existing source-free domain adaptation baselines that do not consider the modality difference between source and target modalities.

[0022] 4. We also empirically show that for the target dataset, the knowledge transfer problem between modalities, such as RGB and depth, is more difficult than simple domain shifts within the same modality, such as sensor changes and viewpoint shifts. (Problem formulation and notation)

[0023]

number

[0024]

number

[0025]

number

[0026]

number

[0027]

number

[0028]

number

[0029]

number

[0030]

number

[0031] Task-irrelevant feature matching involves matching TI features of two modalities in feature space. Even if this captures some class-independent cross-modal mapping between source and target modalities, it lacks information about TR class-conditional cross-modal mapping. We use this term to refer to the cross-modal relationship between source and target given the associated classes. Assuming that the marginal distribution of source features across batches can be modeled as Gaussian, such feature statistics can be fully characterized by their mean and variance. We propose matching feature statistics across source and target to further reduce the modality gap.

[0032]

number

[0033]

number

[0034] The two proposed methods help reduce the modality gap between source and target without accessing task-relevant source data. In addition, we directly use unlabeled target data for knowledge transfer. Specifically, we perform information maximization along with minimization of self-supervised pseudo-label loss.

[0035] Information Maximization (IM): IM is essentially the task of maximizing the mutual information between the target data distribution and its labels predicted by the source model. This mutual information is a combination of the conditional entropy and marginal entropy of the target label distribution.

[0036]

number

[0037]

number

[0038] We calculate an overall objective function as the sum of modality-independent and modality-specific losses and optimize the weights in the feature encoder by minimizing the following objective function, also called the loss function, using the algorithm shown in Figure 4. This figure provides a full description of the SOCKET method in algorithmic form according to an embodiment of the present invention.

number

[0039] We first describe the datasets, baselines, and experimental details used. Then, we present results for single-source and multi-source cross-modal transfer, demonstrating the effectiveness of our method. We also experimentally demonstrate that source-free cross-modal transfer is a much more challenging problem compared to cross-domain knowledge transfer. We conclude the experiment by conducting an analysis of different hyperparameters. (Dataset, baseline and experimental details)

[0040] Datasets: To demonstrate the effectiveness of our method, we conduct extensive testing on publicly available cross-modal datasets. We present results on two RGB-D (RGB and depth) datasets, namely SUN RGB-D and DIML RGB+D, as well as an RGB-NIR Scene (RGB and near-infrared) dataset. Figure 5 summarizes the dataset statistics and shows key features of the datasets used in our experiments, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0041] SUN RGB-D: A scene understanding benchmark dataset containing 10,335 RGB-D image pairs of indoor scenes. This dataset contains images acquired from four different sensors: Kinect version 1 (kv1), Kinect version 2 (kv2), Intel® RealSense, and Asus Xtion. These four sensors are treated as four different domains. All of these images are distributed into 45 classes, 17 of which are common to all domains. These common classes are called TR classes, and the remaining 28 classes are called TI classes. RGB images from the TR classes specific to each domain are used to train four source models, one for each domain. TR depth images from each domain are treated as target modality datasets. Our goal is to perform classification between TR scene classes by adapting the RGB source models to unlabeled target data in the depth modality.

[0042] DIML RGB+D: This publicly available dataset consists of over 200 indoor / outdoor scenes. Instead of the full dataset, which has 1500 / 500 RGB-D pairs for training / testing distributed across 18 scene classes, we use a smaller sample dataset. We split the training pairs into RGB and depth, treating these two as source and target, respectively. We further split these images into TR and TI images according to Figure 5. The synchronized RGB-D frames are captured using a Kinect v2 and Zed stereo camera.

[0043] RGB-NIR Scenes: This publicly available dataset consists of 477 images from nine scene categories captured in RGB and near-infrared (NIR). These images were captured using separate exposures from a modified SLR camera using visible and NIR. We perform single-source knowledge transfer on this dataset by marking six of the categories as TR and the remaining three as TI. We conducted two experiments on this dataset: adapting from RGB to NIR and vice versa. (Baseline method)

[0044] The problem statement we focus on here is novel and has not been previously explored in the literature. Therefore, there is no direct baseline for our method. However, the most relevant work is source-free cross-domain knowledge transfer methods that work for both single-source and multi-source cases. SHOT and DECISION are promising and best-known works on single-source and multi-source SFDA, respectively, and we compare with these two methods.

[0045] Unlike SOCKET, none of these baselines employ a strategy to overcome modality differences and instead use a modality-independent loss L to train the target model. ma Using scene classification as the target task, we show that SOCKET outperforms these baselines for cross-modal knowledge transfer without access to task-relevant source data. (Network Architecture)

[0046] In our experiments, we adopt the well-known Resnet50 model pre-trained on ImageNet as the backbone architecture for training the source model. According to the architecture, the last fully connected (FC) layer is replaced with a bottleneck layer containing 256 units, in which a batch normalization (BN) layer is added at the end of the FC layer. A task-specific FC layer with weight normalization is added at the end of the bottleneck layer. (Implementation of knowledge transfer)

[0047] Recall that we initialize the target model with source weights and the layers of the classifier are frozen. The weights in the feature encoder for the multi-source case and the source mixture weight parameters (ζ k ) is the optimization parameter. For all the following experiments, λ pl is set to 0.3. The regularization parameter λ of the modality-specific loss TI and λ d We set them equal for . Empirically, we choose these parameters to balance the modality-independent loss, ensuring that no loss component outperforms the others by a large margin. Empirically, we find that the range (0.1, 0.5) works best. All values ​​within this range outperform the baseline, and we report the best accuracy among them. For images from modalities other than RGB, such as depth and NIR, we cycle through single-channel images and three-channel images, so that they can be fed through a feature encoder initialized from a source model trained on RGB images. We use a batch size of 32 for all experiments. We run our method three times for all experiments using three random seeds in PyTorch, and report the average accuracy. (Results on the SUN RGB-D dataset)

[0048] Our method is general enough to handle any number of sources and demonstrates both single-source and multi-source knowledge transfer. Figure 6 shows results on the SUN RGB-D dataset for a single-source cross-modal knowledge transfer task from RGB to depth modality without access to task-relevant source data for all pairs of domains, according to an embodiment of the present invention. This figure shows single-source RGB-depth results for all four domains. We treat the unlabeled depth data of each domain as targets and adapt them using source models trained on RGB data from each of the four domains. Rows represent the RGB domains on which the source models are trained. Columns represent knowledge transfer results for the depth domain for the three methods, with "Unadapted" indicating results with unadapted sources, SHOT and SOCKET. It is readily apparent from Figure 6 that for the target domains Kinect V1, Kinect V2, Realsense, and Xtion, SOCKET consistently outperforms the baseline by a generous margin of 6.7%, 4.5%, 2.3%, and 3.8%, respectively, thereby proving the effectiveness of SOCKET in the source-free cross-modal setting. In some cases, SOCKET outperforms the baseline by a very large margin of 12.4% (Realsense-RGB to Kinect V1-Depth) or 9.0% (Xtion-RGB to Xtion-Depth).

[0049] FIG. 7 shows results on the SUN RGB-D dataset for a multi-source cross-modal knowledge transfer task from RGB to depth modality without access to task-relevant source data, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0050] In this case, the figure shows the results of two-source RGB-depth adaptation. For the four domains, we obtain six two-source combinations, each of which is used to adapt to depth data from all four domains. The columns represent knowledge transfer results for domain-specific depth data for DECISION and SOCKET. We again find that, on average, SOCKET outperforms the baseline in all four target domains by a healthy margin. Following the trend of single-source adaptation, SOCKET shows some very impressive improvements in some individual cases, such as a 12.2% improvement from (Kinect v1 + Xtion)-RGB to Kinect v1 depth and a 10.4% improvement from (Kinect v2 + Realsense)-RGB to Kinect v2 depth. (Results on the DIML RGB+D dataset)

[0051] For this dataset, we conducted single-source adaptation experiments by reconstructing the dataset according to FIG. 5. FIG. 8 shows results for the DIML dataset, in comparison with unadapted sources and SHOT, when a different, task-irrelevant dataset is used for SOCKET, according to some embodiments of the present invention. In FIG. 8, we used TI data from both the DIML RGB+D dataset and the SUN RGB-D dataset in two separate columns, with the SUN RGB+D TI data being the same as that used in the experiments on the SUN RGB-D dataset. By doing so, we demonstrate that SOCKET can perform well even with TI data from completely different datasets, finding relative gains of 4.7% and 11.8% over the baseline for these two TI data settings, respectively. (Results for RGB-NIR scene dataset)

[0052] Next, we show that SOCKET also outperforms the baseline when the modalities are RGB and NIR using the RGB-NIR dataset. Here, we follow the split shown in Figure 5. We conduct experiments both from RGB to NIR and vice versa. Figure 9 shows results on the RGB-NIR dataset for a single-source cross-modal knowledge transfer task from RGB to NIR and vice versa, without using task-relevant source data, according to some embodiments of the present invention. The columns represent knowledge transfer results in the depth domain for the three methods, with "Unadapted" indicating results with the unadapted source, SHOT, and SOCKET. For RGB to NIR transfer, SOCKET shows a 3.5% improvement, while for NIR to RGB transfer, it shows a 0.5% improvement over competing methods. (Cross-modal vs. cross-domain)

[0053] To demonstrate the importance of the novel problem we consider, we compare single-source knowledge transfer results on the SUN RGB-D dataset for modality change versus domain shift. Figure 10 shows the difference between cross-modal and cross-domain knowledge transfer results for SUN RGB-D scene classification using SHOT, according to some embodiments of the present invention. We use SHOT, a source-free UDA method, for this experiment. All domain-specific source models are trained on RGB images. For domain shift, the target is all RGB images from the remaining three domains, and we report their average. Domain shift involves changes in sensor configuration, viewpoint, etc. For modality change, the target data is depth images from the same domain. The scene is the same as the RGB source, except that it is captured using a depth sensor. This figure clearly shows that accuracy drops by a large margin of 12.5% ​​when transferring knowledge between different modalities rather than between domains of the same modality. This indicates that cross-modal knowledge transfer is not the same as DA and that a framework like SOCKET is necessary to reduce the modality gap for effective cross-modal knowledge transfer. (Ablation and Sensitivity Analysis) (Contribution of loss component)

[0054] Figure 11 shows the impact on accuracy of the proposed novel loss according to some embodiments of the present invention. The first accuracy column (a) corresponds to single-source RGB-to-depth adaptation on the Kinect V2 domain, while the second column (b) shows the results of multi-source RGB-to-depth adaptation from Kinect V1 Xtion to Kinect V1 domain on the SUN RGB-D dataset. The first row shows the modality-independent loss L ma The second and third rows are the results for L ma We also show the individual impact of the proposed modality-specific losses. In both cases, SOCKET outperforms the baseline. ma The last row, which shows both the proposed loss and the modality-independent loss (L) only in parentheses, gives the best results. ma ) is shown as the accuracy gain. (Influence of number of TI images)

[0055] FIG. 12A shows the impact of the number of TI data on SOCKET results for the SUN RGB-D dataset, according to some embodiments of the present invention. We perform knowledge transfer from Kinect v1 RGB to unlabeled depth data. We use six random TI classes and vary the number of TI images per class from 0 to 60 in 20 steps. This figure clearly shows that increasing the number of TI data samples per class improves the scene classification accuracy for RGB-to-depth transfer for the SUN RGB-D dataset. In summary, for a fixed number of TI classes, the more TI images per class there are, the better SOCKET performs. (Effect of regularization parameter)

[0056] 12B shows the impact of regularization hyperparameters vs. test accuracy for the novel loss proposed as part of SOCKET, according to some embodiments of the present invention. We perform Kinect v1 and Kinect v2 RGB to Kinect v1 depth transfer on the SUN RGB-D dataset. λ TI and λ d are kept equal to each other for values ​​between 0 and 1. Using a value of 0 is the same as using SHOT. From this figure we can see that as the value of the parameter increases, the accuracy also increases up to a certain point and then starts to decrease.

[0057] We identify a novel and challenging problem of cross-modality knowledge transfer without access to task-relevant data from the source modality. For effective knowledge transfer to the target modality when only unlabeled data is available, some embodiments of the present invention can provide a framework, SOCKET, which involves devising a loss function that helps bridge the gap between the two modalities in feature space. Results from both RGB-to-depth and RGB-to-NIR experiments show that SOCKET outperforms baselines designed for source-free unsupervised domain adaptation, which do not perform well with modality shifts.

[0058] According to some embodiments of the present invention, the cross-modality knowledge transfer system and the computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method can reduce storage memory size, solve privacy issues regarding source data, and shorten the training period of the target model network. Therefore, the cross-modality knowledge transfer system and the computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of the present invention can improve the performance of the computer system (processor) and reduce the energy consumption of the computer system.

[0059] According to some features of the present invention, each source model network includes a BN (batch normalization) layer and receives a set of unannotated / unlabeled data sets of the target modality to be classified. In some cases, the adapted target model (trained target network) is used to perform computer vision tasks on the target modality data.

[0060] For a set of "task-irrelevant" datasets, each data point is an image pair with corresponding source and target modality images, which is utilized to aid the knowledge transfer procedure by reducing the source-target modality gap.

[0061] In a cross-modality knowledge transfer system, statistics from one or more batch normalization layers are matched against batch-wise statistics of features of unlabeled target modality data to aid the knowledge transfer procedure by reducing the source-target modality gap.

[0062] Furthermore, an adapted target model can be obtained by using the source model as initialization and tuning the parameters of this model by minimizing one or more loss functions, where the combination of loss functions can include entropy, pseudo-labeling, and diversity, which are defined at the neural network output when unlabeled target data is given as input.

[0063] In some cases, the loss function combination may include feature distances between source and target modality images from task-irrelevant data to help reduce the modality gap between source and target features.

[0064] Additionally, the combination of loss functions may include the discrepancy between the source feature statistics obtained from the batch normalization layer of the source model and the statistics of the features of the unlabeled target dataset.

[0065] In some cases, the source-target modality pair may be an RGB-depth point cloud, an RGB-infrared point cloud, an RGB-LIDAR point cloud, or vice versa, or other combinations of such modalities. The dataset may be in the form of an image taken in a single snapshot or a video taken over a longer period of time. The task performed on the unlabeled target dataset may be a computer vision task, such as image recognition, object recognition, and scene recognition.

[0066] FIG. 13 illustrates a cross-modality knowledge transfer system 1100 according to some embodiments of the present invention. The system 1100 may be a neural network module trained to provide a device layout. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system 1100 includes a TI / TR interface circuit interface 150, at least one processor 120, storage 130, and memory 140. The storage 130 and memory 140 may be integrated into a single circuit and may also be referred to as a memory. The storage 130 includes a task-irrelevant paired dataset 131, an unlabeled target dataset 132, a source model network (source model) 133, a target model network (target model) 134, and a cross-modality knowledge transfer program (computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method) 135. The interface 150 is configured to communicate between the memory 140, the storage 130, and the at least one processor 120. In some cases, the interface 150 may receive the task-irrelevant paired dataset 131, the unlabeled target dataset 132, the source model network (source model) 133, and the target model network (target model) 134 from a database device (server) 195 external to the system 100 via a communication network 190, including a wireless communication network, a wired network, the Internet, or a combination thereof.

[0067] The above-described embodiments of the present invention may be implemented in any of numerous ways. For example, embodiments may be implemented using hardware, software, or a combination thereof. If implemented in software, the software code may be executed on any suitable processor or collection of processors, whether located on a single computer or distributed across multiple computers. Such a processor may be implemented as an integrated circuit, with one or more processors being components of the integrated circuit. However, a processor may be implemented using circuitry in any suitable format.

[0068] Also, embodiments of the present invention may be implemented as a method, examples of which are provided. The order of operations performed as part of the method may be arranged in any suitable manner. Thus, embodiments may be configured to perform operations in an order different from that illustrated, which may include performing some operations simultaneously, even though in the illustrated embodiment they are shown as a sequence of operations.

[0069] In the claims, ordinal terms such as "first" and "second" modifying a claim element do not in themselves imply any priority, precedence, or order of a claim element relative to another element, or any chronological order in which the actions of a method should be performed, but are merely used as labels to distinguish claim elements (when no ordinal term is used) from other elements of the same name.

[0070] Although the present disclosure has been described with examples of preferred embodiments, it is to be understood that various other adaptations and modifications can be made within the spirit and scope of the invention.

[0071] Therefore, it is the object of the appended claims to cover all such variations and modifications as come within the true spirit and scope of the invention.

Claims

1. 1. A cross-modality knowledge transfer system for adapting one or more source model networks to one or more target model networks, the cross-modality knowledge transfer system comprising: a memory, the memory comprising: a task-irrelevant (TI) paired dataset; an unlabeled task-relevant (TR) dataset; the one or more source model networks including a batch normalization (BN) layer, a feature encoder, a convolutional neural network (CNN) layer, and a classifier; the one or more target model networks including the BN layer, the feature encoder, the CNN layer, and the classifier; and a computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method having instructions for: at least one processor configured to execute the steps of the computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method in accordance with the instructions, the steps comprising: extracting TI source features and TR source moments from the one or more source model networks by sending the TI pair datasets through the one or more source model networks, wherein the CNN layers and the classifiers of the one or more source model networks are frozen, the step further comprising: extracting batch-wise TI target features and TR target moments from the one or more target model networks by sending the TI paired dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset through the one or more target model networks, wherein the classifiers of the one or more target model networks are frozen, the step further comprising: computing a modality-independent loss function based on the extracted TR target features of the one or more target model networks; Calculating a modality-specific loss function by calculating the distance between the extracted TI target features and the TI source features, and the distance between the extracted TR target moments and TI source moments; jointly training the feature encoders of the one or more target model networks along with mixture weights by minimizing the calculated modality-independent loss function and the modality-specific loss function; generating a final target model network by combining the one or more trained target model networks.

2. a TI / TR dataset interface configured to receive the TI pair dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset over a communications network; The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 1 , wherein the TI / TR dataset interface is configured to store the received TI pair dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset in the memory.

3. 2. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor further executes transmitting model parameters of the generated final target model network to one or more other untrained target model networks via a network.

4. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 1 , wherein the TI pair dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset are an RGB image and a depth image, an RGB image and an infrared image, or an RGB image and a LIDAR point cloud.

5. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 4 , wherein the unlabeled TR dataset is used for computer vision tasks, including image recognition, object recognition, and scene recognition.

6. The TI source features are extracted from the feature encoder of the one or more source model networks, and the TR source moments are extracted from the BN layer of the one or more source model networks; 2. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 1 , wherein the batch-wise TI target features are extracted from the feature encoder of the one or more target model networks, and the TR target moments are extracted from the BN layer of the one or more target model networks.

7. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 1 , wherein the batch-wise TI target features and the TR target moments extracted from the one or more target model networks are combined using respective mixture weights.

8. 2. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 1, wherein the modality-independent loss function and the modality-specific loss function are used to bridge gaps between the one or more source model networks and the one or more target model networks in feature space.

9. The combination of modality-independent loss functions includes entropy, pseudo-labeling, and diversity; The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 8 , wherein the entropy, pseudo-labeling, and diversity are defined at the output of the one or more source model networks.

10. 9. The cross-modality knowledge transfer system of claim 8, wherein the modality-specific loss function combination comprises a feature distance between the extracted TI source features and the TI target features and a distance between the TI source moments and the TR target moments.

11. 1. A computer-implemented method for cross-modality knowledge transfer, the method using at least one processor and at least one memory, the method comprising: extracting TI source features and TR source moments from one or more source model networks by sending a TI pair dataset through the one or more source model networks, wherein a CNN layer and a classifier of the one or more source model networks are frozen, and the instructions further include: extracting batch-wise TI target features and TR target moments from the one or more target model networks by sending the TI paired dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset through one or more target model networks, wherein classifiers of the one or more target model networks are frozen, and the instructions further include: computing a modality-independent loss function based on the extracted TR target features of the one or more target model networks; Calculating a modality-specific loss function by calculating the distance between the extracted TI target features and the TI source features, and the distance between the extracted TR target moments and TI source moments; jointly training feature encoders of the one or more target model networks along with mixture weights by minimizing the calculated modality-independent loss function and the modality-specific loss function; generating a final target model network by combining the one or more trained target model networks.

12. further receiving the TI pair dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset via a communications network using a TI / TR dataset interface; 12. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 11, wherein the TI / TR dataset interface is configured to store the received TI pair datasets and the unlabeled TR datasets in the at least one memory.

13. 12. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to transmit model parameters of the generated final target model network to one or more other untrained target model networks via a network.

14. 12. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 11, wherein the TI pair dataset and the unlabeled TR dataset are an RGB image and a depth image, an RGB image and an infrared image, or an RGB image and a LIDAR point cloud.

15. 15. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 14, wherein the unlabeled TR dataset is used for computer vision tasks, including image recognition, object recognition, and scene recognition.

16. the TI source features are extracted from the feature encoders of the one or more source model networks; the TR source moments are extracted from a BN layer of the one or more source model networks; The batch-wise TI target features are extracted from the feature encoder of the one or more target model networks; 12. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 11, wherein the TR target moments are extracted from the BN layer of the one or more target model networks.

17. 12. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 11, wherein the batch-wise TI target features and the TR target moments extracted from the one or more target model networks are combined using respective mixture weights.

18. 12. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 11, wherein the modality-independent loss function and the modality-specific loss function are used to bridge gaps between the one or more source model networks and the one or more target model networks in feature space.

19. The combination of modality-independent loss functions includes entropy, pseudo-labeling, and diversity; 20. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 18, wherein the entropy, pseudo-labeling, and diversity are defined at the output of the one or more source model networks.

20. 20. The computer-implemented cross-modality knowledge transfer method of claim 18, wherein the combination of modality-independent loss functions includes a feature distance between the extracted TI source features and the TI target features and a distance between the TI source moments and the TR target moments.

Images