Transformer-Based Student Model for Real-Time Object Detection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Machine learning models, particularly in medical imaging and signal processing, face challenges due to memory and processing constraints, making real-time object detection impossible on resource-limited hardware.

Innovation Solution

A method using a smaller machine learning model trained with an attention mechanism, leveraging a larger teacher model's attention maps to improve detection accuracy and efficiency, allowing for real-time object detection on lightweight processors through knowledge distillation and model compression.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If a large machine learning model is used for object detection, then detection accuracy is improved, but memory requirements and processing complexity increase, making real-time detection impossible on resource-limited hardware

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidmodel size and processing complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a simplified copy (student model) of the teacher model's attention mechanism. The student model replicates the essential functionality of the teacher model's attention maps but with reduced computational complexity, allowing it to run on resource-limited hardware while maintaining comparable detection accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent extracts only the critical attention mechanism components from the large teacher model and isolates them into a separate, lightweight student model. This extraction process removes unnecessary computational overhead while preserving the core object detection capability, enabling real-time processing on constrained devices.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

2Measurement precision

If a large machine learning model is deployed, then detection performance is improved, but processing speed decreases due to computational constraints

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection performanceVSAvoidprocessing speed
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSSpeed

Solution Approach 1:

The student model is trained to replicate the teacher model's attention maps and detection performance but with a simplified architecture that processes information faster. This copying approach preserves detection performance while reducing the computational time required for each detection task, enabling real-time processing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameters of the attention mechanism by training the student model to produce attention maps that closely match the teacher model's outputs. This parameter optimization allows the lighter student model to achieve comparable detection performance with significantly faster processing speeds.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Speed

If a lightweight model is used for real-time detection, then processing speed is improved, but detection accuracy deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereal-time processing capabilityVSAvoiddetection accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The student model is trained using feedback from the teacher model's attention maps. During training, the student model adjusts its parameters based on the discrepancy between its attention maps and the teacher model's attention maps, continuously improving its detection accuracy until it achieves performance comparable to the teacher model despite having fewer computational resources.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent optimizes the student model's parameters through training on attention map discrepancies, allowing the lightweight model to achieve high detection accuracy. The training process adjusts the student model's internal parameters to minimize the difference between its outputs and the teacher model's attention maps, thereby improving detection accuracy without sacrificing processing speed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20240371500A1Generating location data
Publication Date: 2024.11.07 KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS NV
  • US20240371500A1 patent drawing
  • US20240371500A1 patent drawing
  • US20240371500A1 patent drawing

AI summary

In an embodiment, a computer-implemented method (100) is described. The method (100) comprises receiving (102) input data. The method 100 further comprises generating (104) location data indicative of a location of any detected at least one feature of interest in the received input data. The location data is generated using a first machine learning, ML, model configured to detect whether or not there is at least one feature of interest in the received input data. The first ML model is trained based on a learning process implemented by a second ML model configured to detect whether or not there is at least one feature of interest in the received input data. The first ML model and the second ML model are each configured to use an attention mechanism to generate: at least one attention map from at least one layer of the first ML model; and a plurality of attention maps from a plurality of layers of the second ML model. The first ML model comprises fewer layers than the second ML model. At least one attention map generated by the second ML model is used to train the first ML model. The first and second ML models comprise a transformer-based object detection architecture.