We trainedtwo localisation models, each on a single scale: S= 256andS= 384(due to the time
constraints,we didnot use trainingscale jitteringforour ILSVRC-2014submission). Trainingwas
initialised with the correspondingclassiﬁcation models ( trained on the same scales), and the initial
learning rate was set to 10−3. We exploredboth ﬁne-tuningall layers and ﬁne-tuningonly the ﬁrst
two fully-connected layers, as done in (Sermanetetal., 201 4). The last fully-connected layer was
initialisedrandomlyandtrainedfromscratch.
Testing. We consider two testing protocols. The ﬁrst is used for compa ring different network
modiﬁcations on the validation set, and considers only the b oundingbox prediction for the ground
truth class (to factor out the classiﬁcation errors). The bo unding box is obtained by applying the
networkonlyto thecentralcropoftheimage.
The second, fully-ﬂedged, testing procedure is based on the dense application of the localisation
ConvNet to the whole image, similarly to the classiﬁcation t ask (Sect. 3.2). The difference is that
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