user: text: Write a concise one-sentence TLDR summary of the scientific paper content below.

Title: Dynamic Scale Inference by Entropy Minimization

Paper content:
Given the variety of the visual world there is not one true scale for recognition: objects may appear at drastically different sizes across the visual field.
Rather than enumerate variations across filter channels or pyramid levels, dynamic models locally predict scale and adapt receptive fields accordingly.
The degree of variation and diversity of inputs makes this a difficult task.
Existing methods either learn a feedforward predictor, which is not itself totally immune to the scale variation it is meant to counter, or select scales by a fixed algorithm, which cannot learn from the given task and data.
We extend dynamic scale inference from feedforward prediction to iterative optimization for further adaptivity.
We propose a novel entropy minimization objective for inference and optimize over task and structure parameters to tune the model to each input.
Optimization during inference improves semantic segmentation accuracy and generalizes better to extreme scale variations that cause feedforward dynamic inference to falter.
The world is infinite in its variations, but our models are finite.
While inputs differ in many dimensions and degrees, a deep network is only so deep and wide.
To nevertheless cope with variation, there are two main strategies: static enumeration and dynamic adaptation.
Static enumeration defines a set of variations, processes them all, and combines the results.
For example, pyramids enumerate scales (Burt & Adelson, 1983; Kanazawa et al., 2014) and group-structured filters enumerate orientations (Cohen & Welling, 2017) .
Dynamic adaptation selects a single variation, conditioned on the input, and transforms processing accordingly.
For example, scale-space search (Lindeberg, 1994; Lowe, 2004) selects a scale transformation from input statistics and end-to-end dynamic networks select geometric transformations (Jaderberg et al., 2015; Dai et al., 2017) , parameter transformations (De Brabandere et al., 2016) , and feature transformations (Perez et al., 2017) directly from the input.
Enumeration and adaptation both help, but are limited by computation and supervision, because the sets enumerated and ranges selected are bounded by model size and training data.
Deep networks for vision exploit enumeration and adaptation, but generalization is still limited.
Networks are enumerative, by convolving with a set of filters to cover different variations then summing across them to pool the variants (LeCun et al., 1998; Krizhevsky et al., 2012; Zeiler & Fergus, 2014) .
For scale variation, image pyramids (Burt & Adelson, 1983 ) and feature pyramids (Shelhamer et al., 2017; enumerate scales, process each, and combine the outputs.
However, static models have only so many filters and scales, and may lack the capacity or supervision for the full data distribution.
Dynamic models instead adapt to each input (Olshausen et al., 1993) .
The landmark scale invariant feature transform (Lowe, 2004 ) extracts a representation adapted to scales and orientations predicted from input statistics.
Dynamic networks, including spatial transformers (Jaderberg et al., 2015) and deformable convolution (Dai et al., 2017) , make these predictions and transformations end-to-end.
Predictive dynamic inference is however insufficient: the predictor may be imperfect in its architecture or parameters, or may not generalize to data it was not designed or optimized for.
Bottom-up prediction, with only one step of adaptation, can struggle to counter variations in scale and other factors that are too large or unfamiliar.
To further address the kinds and degrees of variations, including extreme out-of-distribution shifts, we devise a complementary third strategy: unsupervised optimization during inference.
We define an unsupervised objective and a constrained set of variables for effective gradient optimization.
Our novel inference objective minimizes the entropy of the model output to optimize for confidence.
The variables optimized over are task parameters for pixel-wise classification and structure parameters Accuracy is high and prediction entropy is low for training and testing at the same scale (left).
Accuracy drops and entropy rises when tested at 3x the training scale, even when the network is equipped with dynamic receptive fields to adapt to scale variation (middle).
Previous approaches are limited to one-step, feedforward scale prediction, and are unable to handle a 3x shift.
In contrast our iterative gradient optimization approach is able to adapt further (right), and achieve higher accuracy by minimizing entropy with respect to task and scale parameters.
for receptive field adaptation, which are updated together to compensate for scale shifts.
This optimization functions as top-down feedback to iteratively adjust feedforward inference.
In effect, we update the trained model parameters to tune a custom model for each test input.
Optimization during inference extends dynamic adaptation past the present limits of supervision and computation.
Unsupervised optimization boosts generalization beyond training by top-down tuning during testing.
Iterative updates decouple the amount of computation, and thus degree of adaptation, from the network architecture.
Our main result is to demonstrate that adaptation by entropy optimization improves accuracy and generalization beyond adaptation by prediction (see Figure 1 ), which we show for semantic segmentation by inference time optimization of a dynamic Gaussian receptive field model (Shelhamer et al., 2019) on the PASCAL VOC (Everingham et al., 2010) dataset.
Dynamic inference by optimization iteratively adapts the model to each input.
Our results show that optimization to minimize entropy with respect to score and scale parameters extends adaptivity for semantic segmentation beyond feedforward dynamic inference.
Generalization improves when the training and testing scales differ substantially, and modest refinement is achieved even when the training and testing scales are the same.
While we focus on entropy minimization and scale inference, more optimization for dynamic inference schemes are potentially possible through the choice of objective and variables.
is the out-of-distribution prediction for our iterative optimization method.
Our method corrects noisy, over-segmented fragments and false negatives in true segments.

assistant: text: Unsupervised optimization during inference gives top-down feedback to iteratively adjust feedforward prediction of scale variation for more equivariant recognition.