RDTextSpotter: Enhancing text spotting with resampling-driven query update in transformer


Abstract

Recently, end-to-end scene text spotting methods based on the DETR framework have achieved significant success, showcasing their potential in designing efficient text spotters by initializing and updating queries. However, these methods rely solely on the features sampled during the query initialization phase, failing to fully exploit the synergy between detection and recognition tasks. This results in performance degradation and poor generalization. To address the aforementioned challenges, we propose RDTextSpotter, which employs a resampling-driven query update technique to optimize the synergy between text detection and recognition. Specifically, RDTextSpotter is built on the following core concepts: First, enhanced query initialization allows us to select bounding boxes that account for both text category and positional information, improving the quality of initial queries. Second, after the initial modeling of text queries, we introduce a resampling-driven query update module. This module resamples and updates text queries in subsequent decoder layers based on iterative detection box information, optimizing the synergy between the two tasks. Finally, during the prediction phase, we implement a weighted query fusion module to improve the stability of Hungarian matching. Extensive experiments show that RDTextSpotter outperforms state-of-the-art methods in both quantitative and qualitative metrics.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].