ConvNet to the whole image, similarly to the classiﬁcation t ask (Sect. 3.2). The difference is that
instead of the class score map, the output of the last fully-c onnected layer is a set of bounding
box predictions. To come up with the ﬁnal prediction, we util ise the greedy merging procedure
of Sermanetetal. (2014), which ﬁrst merges spatially close predictions (by averaging their coordinates), and then rates them based on the class scores, obta ined from the classiﬁcation ConvNet.
When several localisation ConvNets are used, we ﬁrst take th e union of their sets of boundingbox
predictions, and then run the mergingprocedureon the union . We did not use the multiple pooling
10
Publishedasa conferencepaperat ICLR2015
offsets technique of Sermanetetal. (2014), which increase s the spatial resolution of the bounding
boxpredictionsandcanfurtherimprovetheresults.
A.2 L OCALISATION EXPERIMENTS
In this work we investigate the effect of the convolutional network depth on
its accuracy in the large-scale image recognition setting. Our main
contribution is a thorough evaluation of networks of increasing depth using an
architecture with very small (3x3) convolution filters, which shows that a
significant improvement on the prior-art configurations can be achieved by
pushing the depth to 16-19 weight layers. These findings were the basis of our
ImageNet Challenge 2014 submission, where our team secured the first and the
second places in the localisation and classification tracks respectively. We
also show that our representations generalise well to other datasets, where
they achieve state-of-the-art results. We have made our two best-performing
ConvNet models publicly available to facilitate further research on the use of
deep visual representations in computer vision.
Karen Simonyan Andrew Zisserman