PointOBB-v2: Towards Simpler, Faster, and Stronger Single Point Supervised Oriented Object Detection
Authors: Botao Ren
Xue Yang
Yi Yu
Junwei Luo
Zhidong Deng
Venue: ICLR 2025 Poster (2025)
Keywords: Oriented Object Detection
Point Supervised Object Detection
Primary area: unsupervised, self-supervised, semi-supervised, and supervised representation learning
TL;DR: A simpler, faster, and stronger single point supervised oriented object detection method.

Abstract: Single point supervised oriented object detection has gained attention and made initial progress within the community. Diverse from those approaches relying on one-shot samples or powerful pretrained models (e.g. SAM), PointOBB has shown promise due to its prior-free feature. In this paper, we propose PointOBB-v2, a simpler, faster, and stronger method to generate pseudo rotated boxes from points without relying on any other prior. Specifically, we first generate a Class Probability Map (CPM) by training the network with non-uniform positive and negative sampling. We show that the CPM is able to learn the approximate object regions and their contours. Then, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is applied to accurately estimate the orientation and the boundary of objects.  By further incorporating a separation mechanism, we resolve the confusion caused by the overlapping on the CPM, enabling its operation in high-density scenarios.  Extensive comparisons demonstrate that our method achieves a training speed 15.58$\times$ faster and an accuracy improvement of 11.60\%/25.15\%/21.19\% on the DOTA-v1.0/v1.5/v2.0 datasets compared to the previous state-of-the-art, PointOBB. This significantly advances the cutting edge of single point supervised oriented detection in the modular track. Code and models will be released.

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
POINTOBB-V2: TOWARDS SIMPLER, FASTER, AND STRONGER SINGLE POINT SUPERVISED ORIENTED OBJECT DETECTION
Botao Ren'*, Xue Yang" Junwei Luo", Zhidong Dengit
BNRist, THUAI, Department of Computer Science, Tsinghua University Department of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University
Southeast University "Wuhan University
Code: https://g.ttub..cm//aaagggess
ABSTRACT
Single point supervised oriented object detection has gained attention and made initial progress within the community. Diverse from those approaches relying on one-shot samples or powerful pretrained models (e.g. SAM), PointOBB has shown promise due to its prior-free feature. In this paper, we propose PointOBB- v2, a simpler, faster, and stronger method to generate pseudo rotated boxes from points without relying on any other prior. Specifically, we first generate a Class Probability Map (CPM) by training the network with non-uniform positive and negative sampling. We show that the CPM is able to learn the approximate object regions and their contours. Then, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is applied accurately estimate the orientation and the boundary of objects. By further incorporating a separation mechanism, we resolve the confusion caused by the overlapping the CPM, enabling its operation in high-density scenarios. Exten- sive comparisons demonstrate that our method achieves a training speed 15.58 x faster and an accuracy improvement of 11.60% 15%/21.1999 on the DOTA- v1.0/v1.5 1,5v22.00 datasets compared to the previous state-of-the-arr, PointOBB. This significantly advances the cutting edge of single point supervised oriented detec- tion in the modular track.
INTRODUCTION
Oriented object detection essential for accurately labeling small and densely packed objects, es- pecially in scenarios like remote sensing imagery, retail analysis, and scene text detection, where Oriented Bounding Boxes (OBBs) provide precise annotations. However, annotating OBBs is labor- intensive and costly. Therefore, numerous weakly supervised methods have emerged in recent years, including horizontal bounding box supervision and point supervision. Representative methods for horizontal bounding box supervision include H2RBox (Yang al., 2023a) and H2RBox-v2 (Yu et al., 2023). addition, point supervision, which only requires labeling the point and category for each object, significantly reduces the annotation cost. Notable point-supervised methods include P2RBox (Cao et al., 2024), Point2RBox (Yu et al., 2024), and PointOBB (Luo et al., 2024).
As illustrated in Fig. 1, existing point-supervised oriented object detection methods be broadly categorized into three paradigms: (a) SAM-based methods (Cao et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2024) rely on the powerful SAM (Kirillov et al., 2023) model, which, although effective natural im- ages, struggles with cross-domain tasks like aerial imagery, particularly in small object and densely packed scenarios. Additionally, SAM- based methods are slow and memory-intensin due to post- processing; (b) Prior-based Weakly-supervised Oriented Object Detection (WOOD) methods, such as Boin (Yu et al., 2024), integrate human priors which reduce generalizability since different datasets require distinct prior knowledge. Further, the end-to-end setup limits flexibility, prevent- ing these methods from leveraging more powerful detectors and benefiting from their performance improvements; (c) Modular WOOD methods (Luo et al., 2024) do not rely manually designed
"qqual contribution. 'Corresponding author

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Flexible:
Flexble:
Flexible
Prior:
Prior:
Prior:
Speed:
Speec: Result
+
Speed:
Speeth
Result
Trainable
Result
Result
OBB Detector
OBB Detector
Detoctor
Psendo RBox
Fixed
OBA Detector
Prior Model
Pseudo RB
Panudo RRox
MIl
Mi
Post Process
Label
PPCA
Slow
SAM
Human Prior
MultiVView
Point Image
Point
Image
Point
Image
Point:
Image
Fast
eg PainOBB
PeintOBB~2
og P.RtRo,, PMHO
eg Peint2RFFox
()) SAM-based OOD
(b) Prior-based WOOD
(c) Modular WOOD
Figure 1: Compare with existing point supervised methods, including (a) Prompt OOD (i.e. SAM
based); (b-c) Weakly OOD: Prior-based and Modular. OOD means Oriented Object Detection.
priors and offer greater flexibility by decoupling pscudo-label generation from the detector, making them more suitable for efficient and scalable detection tasks.
As previous state-of-the-art method, PointOBB falls under the modular WOOD category and offers a feasible solution for point-supervised detection. However, it has several practical limitations: the pseudo-label generation process is very slow, taking approximately 7-8 times longer than the subse- quent detector training. Additionally, its training requires significant GPU memory due to multiple view transformations. Moreover, the variability in the number of Region of Interest (Rol) propos- als can lead to out-of-mmeory issues, particularly in dense object scenarios. Although limiting the number of Rol proposals can mitigate this issue, results degraded performance.
Considering the aforementioned issues, our motivation is to design a simpler, faster, and stronger method, which leads to the development of PointOBB-v2. Our approach aims to retain the strengths of the modular WOOD paradigm while addressing the inefficiencies of PointOBB, particularly in terms of speed and memory consumption, making more suitable for real-world applications.
PointOBB-v2 introduces novel and concise pipeline that discards the teacher-student structure, achieving significant improvements in the accuracy and generation speed of the pseudo-label, and improving memory efficiency, especially in scenarios with small and dense objects. Specifically, we generate Class Probability Maps (CPM) from point annotations and design novel sample assign- ment strategy to capture object contours and orientations from the CPM. Next, we apply non-uniform sampling based on the probability distribution and use Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to de- termine object boundaries and directions. To address dense object distributions, we design separa- tion mechanism to reduce confusion in pseudo-label generation caused by connected CPMs.
Experimental results demonstrate that method consistently improves accuracy, speed, and mem- ory efficiency across various datasets compared to PointOBB, achieving several state-of-the-an re- sults. Specifically, on the DOTA-v 1.0 dataset, our method, when using pseudo-labels for training with Rotated FCOS, improves the mAP from 30.08% (PointOBB) to 41.68%, a gain of 11.60% mAP. In more challenging datasets like DOTA-v1.5 and DOTA-v2.0, which contain higher density of small objects, our method achieves mAP of 36.39% and 27.22%. with respective gains of 25. 15% and 21.19% over PointOBB, demonstrating its robustness objects. Furthermore, our pseudo-label generation process is 15.58 times faster, reducing the time from 22.28 hours to 1.43 hours. On the DOTA-v1.5 and DOTA-v2.0 datasets, PointOBB requires limiting the number of Rol proposals due to high memory consumption, while our method operates without such restrictions, with a memory usage approximately 8GB.
handling small and densely packed
Our contributions are summarized as follows:
We propose novel and efficient pipeline for point-supervised oriented object detection, which eliminates the time- and memory-consumee teacher-stude student structure, significantly improving pseudo-label generation speed and reducing memory usage.
2

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Without any additional deep network design, method relies solely class probability maps to generate accurate object contours, using efficient PCA to determine object directions and bound- aries. We also design vector constraint method to distinguish small objects in dense scenarios, improving detection performance.
Experimental results show that our method consistently outperforms PointOBB across multiple datasets, achieving 1.60%%/55.1%%/11.1999 gain on the - datasets, with 15.58 x speedup in pseudo-label generation and memory usage reduced to approximately 8GB without limiting Rol proposals.
2 RELATED WORK
In addition to horizontal detection (Zhao et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2020), oriented object detection (Yang et al., 2018: Wen et al., 2023) has received extensive attention. In this section, we first intro- duce oriented detection supervised by rotated boxes. Then, approaches to point-supervised oriented detection and other weakly-supervisee settings are discussed.
2.1 RBOX-SUPERVISED ORIENTED DETECTION
Representative works include mnchor-based detector Rotated RetinaNet (Lin et al., 2020), anchor- free detector Rotated FCOS (Tian et al., 2019), and two-stage solutions, e.g. Rol Transformer (Ding et al., 2019), Oriented R-CNN (Xie et al., 2021), l), and ReDet (Han et al., 2021). Some research en- hances the detector by exploiting alignment features, e.g. Ret (Yang et al., 2021b) and S A-Net (Han et al., 2022). The angle regression may face boundary discontinuity and remedies are devel- oped, including modulated losses (Yang al., 2019a; 2022; Qian al., 2021) that alleviate loss jumps, angle coders (Yang & Yan, 2020; Yang et al., 2021a; Yang & Yan, 2022; Yu & Da, 2023) that convert the angle into boundary-free coded data, and Gaussian-basee losses (Yang et al., 2021c;d; 2023b;e; Murrugarra- Llerena et al., 2024) transforming rotated bounding boxes into Gaussian dis- tributions. RepPoint-based methods (Yang et al., 2019b; Hou et al., 2023; Li et al., 2022) provide alternatives that predict a set of sample points that bounds the spatial extent of an object.
2.2 POINT-SUPERVISED ORIENTED DETECTION
Recently, several methods for point-supervised oriented detection have been proposed: 1) P2RBox (Cao et al., 2024), PMHO (Zhang et al., 2024) and PointSAM (Liu et al., 2024) propose oriented object detection with point prompts by employing the zero-shot Point-to-Mask ability of SAM (Kir- illov et al., 2023). 2) Point2RBox (Yu et al., 2024) has introduced a novel end-to and-to-end approach based on knowledge combination in this domain. 3) PointOBB (Luo et al., 2024) achieves point annotation based Box generation method for oriented object detection through scale-sensitive consistency and multiple instance learning.
Among these methods, P2RBox, PMHO and PointSAM require SAM model pre-trained on massive amounts of labeled data, whereas Point2RBox requires one-shot samples (i.e. human priors) for each category. Although achieving better accuracy, they are not as general as PointOBB. Hence, we choose PointOBB as our baseline develop simpler, faster, and stronger method, PointOBB-v2.
2.3 OTHER WEAKLY-SUPERVISEE SETTINGS
Compared to the Point-to-RBos some other geakky-suupervsee settings have been better studied. These methods are potentially applicable to our Point-to-RBoo task setting by using cascade pipeline, such as Point-to-HBox-to. Box and Pointtto-Mask--o-RRBox In our experiment, cascade pipelines powered by oftte-of-theatt weakly-supervised approaches are also adopted for compari- son. Here, several representative work are introduced.
The seminal work H2RBox (Yang et al., 2023a) circumvents the segmentation step and achieves RBox detection directly from HBox annotation. With HBox annotations for the same object in various orientations, the geometric constraint limits the object to few candidate angles. Supplemented with a self-supervised branch eliminating the undesired results, an HBox-to- RBox paradigm is established. An enhanced version H2RBox-v2 (Yu et al., 2023) is proposed to
HBox-to-RBox.
3

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Generate CPM
Label Assignment
Positive Labels
Negative Label
Positive Label
Ignored
Backbone
Negative
Labels
Projection
Training Target
Find Orientation Boundary
Weighted PCA
Find Boundary
Sample Grid Weight
Principle AxeS
Our PointOBB-v2 first generates a Class Probability Map (CPM) with positive and negative sample assignment strategy during training. It then applies Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to infer object orientation and boundaries to generate pseudo labels.
Figure 2:
leverage the reflection symmetry of objects to estimate their angle, further boosting the HBox-to- RBox performance. Elf-Det (Wang al., 2024) uses explicit equivariance branch for learning rotation consistency, and an implicit equivariance branch for learning position, aspect ratio, and scale consistency. Some studies (Iqbal al., 2021; Sun al., 2021; Zhu al., 2023) use additional annotated data for training, which are also attractive but less general.
Point-to-HBox. Several related approaches have been developed, including: 1) P2BNet (Chen al., 2022) samples box proposals of different sizes around the labeled point and classify them to achieve puiet-supervised horizontal object detection. 2) PSOD (Gao et al., 2022) achieves point-supervised salient object detection using an edge detector and adaptive masked flood fill.
Point-to-Mask. Point2Mask (Li al., 2023) is proposed to achieve panoptic segmentation using only a single point annotation per target for training. SAM (Segment Anything Model) (Kirillov et al., 2023) produces object masks from input point/HBBx prompts. Though RBoxes can ob- tained from the segmentation mask by finding the minimum circumscribed rectangle, such a com- plex pipeline can be less cost-efficient and perform worse (Yang et al., 2023a; Yu et al., 2023).
METHOD
Our task focuses on oriented object detection with single point supervision. We first utilize point annotations for each object in the training dataset to generate pseudo labels, which are then used train an existing detector. As shown in Fig. 2, the model first generates Class Probability Map (CPM) based on the point annotations. Specifically, during training, we devise a positive and negative sample assignment strategy, where the resulting CPM outlines the rough object contours, with higher probabilities concentrated around the point and along the object axes.
We generate pseudo oriented bounding boxes according to CPM. We perform non-uniform sampling around the point annotation of each object, guided by the probability distribution within the CPM. We convert the sampling process into a weighted probability approach, which maintains the same expected result while eliminating the variance introduced by random sampling. By applying Prin- cipal Component Analysis (PCA) to the weighted grid points, we can infer the object's 's orientation. We then determine the object boundaries by combining the thresholded CPM with the inferred ori- entation. Furthermore, to address densely populated object scenarios, we introduce a mechanism for differentiating between closely situated objects, ensuring effective separation and accurate detection.
4

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Input Image
Learned CPM
Input Image
Learned CPM
Figure 3: Visualization of class probability map (CPM).
3.1 CLASS PROBABILITY MAP GENERATION
The Class Probability Map (CPM) represents the per-class probability for each point on the feature map, with values ranging between [0, IJ. To generate the CPM, our model first takes an image of dimension (C, H, W) input and processes it through ResNet-50 (He et al., 2016) backbone with an FPN (Lin et al., 2017) structure. The final class probability map is derived from the highest- resolution feature map of the FPN, which is then projected through a projection layer. The output is a map of size (Nelass: Ho, Wo. Formally, it is defined as:
CPM = Proj(f
(1)
where CPM is the class probability map, Proj(.) represents the projection layer, and f(T)o is the highest-resolution feature map from the ResNet-50 + FPN.
3.2 LABEL ASSIGNMENT
A key component of approach is the design of robust sample assignment strategy for both pos- itive and negative samples. This strategy is essential for building an accurate CPM, which outlines rough object contours, concentrating higher probabilities around object centers and along their axes. To ensure reliable separation of objects, especially in densely populated scenarios, our method ad- dresses the challenge of closely situated objects by introducing additional mechanisms for effective differentiation. We illustrate this label assignment in the upper-right part of Fig. 2. The specific details of the sample assignment process are outlined below:
Positive Label Assignment. For positive samples, we select all points within fixed radius b (set to our model) around each point. a point lies within multiple such radii, is assigned to the closest center. The condition for positive samples is as follows:
3GT, E GT (d(p, GT,) < b1) A (d(p, GT,) min(d(p, GTi~N)))
(2)
= is positive, cls(p) = cls(GT,))
Negative Label Assignment. Given ground truth objects (GT), for each GT,, we identify its nearest neighboring object GT, based on the Euclidean distance. This gives vector distman with dimension [N]. where each element dist, represents the minimum distance between GT, and its closest neighbor. We then draw circle with radius dist, around GT, where (set to 1 in our model) is a fixed proportional constant. Points outside all such circles are designated as negative samples. The negative sample condition is formulated
VGT, E GTi-N, d(p, GT.) > a dist, p negative.
(3)
In addition the above defined negative labels, also the middle region between objects as negative to make the boundaries clearer between densely packed objects (denoted as "Neg./M" in ablation Tab. 4). For each GT, we identify its nearest neighbor GT, that belongs the same class, A circle is drawn with a radius b2 (set to 4 in our model) and centered at the midpoint of the line connecting GT, and GT,, and points within this circle are assigned as negative samples. The condition is defined as:
VGT, E N JGT, E GT d(G,,, GT₃) = min(d(GT, GTIwN)) AcIs(GT,) cls(GT,) A d(p, (GT, + (/2) < 62 + p is negative.
(4)
5

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Robustness. While we do not explicitly define positive and negative samples based precise object contours or oriented bounding boxes, which may result in some inaccuracies during label assignment (i.e. incorrectly assigning a small portion of positive negative samples during training), this does not significantly hinder our method's ability to learn accurate object contours. These minor label assignment inaccuracies, particularly in densely populated regions or for objects with extreme aspect ratios, do not affect the overall robustness and effectiveness of the approach. As demonstrated in Fig. 3, our strategy is capable of learning the correct contours, even for objects with large aspect ratios and in densely packed scenarios.
3.3 ORIENTATION AND BOUNDARY ESTIMATION VIA PCA
After obtaining the CPM, we sample points around each ground truth based on the class probabil- ities, and then apply Principal Component Analysis (PCA) the sampled points determine the object's orientation. As shown bottom part of Fig. 2, we sample points around the GT based on the probabilities in the CPM for the corresponding object class. We choose 7 x 7 grid centered at the GT with the coordinates the 49 integer points 21 as:
(ar, v) x E (-3, 3). E 3)
For each grid point 2;, we can compute the CPM probability p; and decide whether to sample the point based this probability. Once have the sampled points, we apply PCA to find the primary direction of the point set, which represents the object's 's orientation. While PCA provides the correct primary direction in expectation, the randomness introduced by sampling can cause variance in the result from a single pass. Although averaging over multiple sampling runs can mitigate this variance, it also increases computational cost.
To address this, we propose an equivalent method that transforms probabilistic sampling into weighted coordinate transformation. Instead of sampling points probabilistically, we assign weight of Pt to each point ensuring the same expected outcome while eliminating the variance caused by random sampling. The covariance matrix then defined as:
C== Epize (z: -1=)-
(6)
We then perform eigenvalue decomposition on C₁:
C.u+ A2t.
The eigenvector i1 corresponding to the largest eigenvalue X is chosen as the primary direction. Since C. is real symmetric matrix, the secondary direction is guaranteed to be orthogonal to the primary direction. This orthogonality corresponds to the perpendicular relationship between the two adjacent sides of an oriented bounding box.
After identifying the primary and secondary directions, we determine the object boundaries along these directions. Starting from the center, move along each direction and stop when the value a position falls below threshold, indicating the object boundary.
3.4 OBJЕCT DIFFERENTIATION IN DENSE SCENARIOS
In dense scenarios, objects can be difficult to distinguish on the CPM. This can affect the PCA's ability to determine the object orientation and the boundary identification. To address this, we design a "Vector Constraint Suppression" method to resolve boundary ambiguity.
Vector Constraint Suppression. Even after determining the correct orientation in dense scenarios, the object boundaries may still be unclear, making it difficult to precisely locate them using the probability threshold described in Sec. 3.3. In most cases, simply distinguishing between two closely positioned objects is sufficient to define the object's ss boundary.
We propose simple constraint: For each GT,, we first find its nearest same-class neighbor GT; and compute the vector u = (GT,, GT,) between GT, and GT,. If the angle between this vector and the primary secondary direction is smaller than threshold (set π n/6 in our model),

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Table 1: Results of each category on the DOTA-vI.0 dataset. FCOSR and ORCNN refer Rotated FCOS and Oriented R-CNN. indicates using additional human knowledge priors.
Method
BD
GTF
SH
TC
SBF
SP
HC
mAP3s
Poim2MMskk RBox
23.1
388
1.3
3.3
19.0
0.0
9.5
7.1
9.72
P2BNet+H2RBox
24.7
35.9
7.0
27.9
3.3
17.5
17.5
0.8
34.0
6.3
49.6
11.6
27.2
18.8
19.63
P2BNe++H2RBxx-22
11.0
44.8
14.9
15.4
36.8
16.7
27.8
12.1
31.2
3,4
50.6
12.6
36.7
12.5
21.87
PointRRoxx RC
62.9
64.3
14.4
35.0
28.2
38.9
33.3
25.2
2.2
44.5
3.4
48.1
25.9
45.0
22.6
34,07
Poin(RBox-SEe -KK"
53.3
63.9
3.7
50.9
40.0
39.2
45.7
76.7
10.5
56.1
5.4
49.5
24.2
51.2
33.8
40.27
PointOBB (PCOSR)
26.1
65.7
9.1
59.4
65.8
34,9
29.8
0.5
2.3
16.7
0.6
49.0
21.8
41.0
36.7
30.08
PointOBB v2 (PCOSR)
64.5
27.8
1.9
36.2
58.8
47.2
53.4
90.5
62.2
45.3
12.1
41.7
8.1
43.7
32.0
41.68
PointOBB (ORCNN)
28.3
70.7
1.5
64.9
68.8
46.8
33.9
9.1
10.0
20.1
0.2
47.0
29.7
38.2
30.6
33.31
BointOBB-v2 22 (ORCNN)
63.7
45.6
2.0
39.5
50.5
49.6
45.4
89.8
62.9
41.3
13.6
42.8
8.9
39.5
29.5
41.64
PointOBB (ReDDet)
24.2
75.0
0.5
60.6
59.3
46.1
45.7
6.1
10.1
25.0
0.2
50.4
30.0
45.0
31.1
33.95
B-intOBB-v2 (ReDet)
65.4
52.1
2.2
44.4
55.0
49.3
51.8
89.0
70.2
47.0
16.2
43.9
13.0
43.8
29.4
44.85
we consider this direction valid for boundary definition. The boundary is then constrained by the following condition:
1 u Uh < = d(GT,, if angllee,,, vx)
(8)
where va is the primary secondary direction, GT2 is the nearest same-class object to GT; and means that the boundary should be closer to GT, than to GTy.
EXPERIMENT
4.1 DATASETS
DOTA (Xia et al., 2018) is a large-scale dataset designed for object detection in aerial images, covering various object categories and complexities. DOTA has three versions:
DOTA-v1.0 has 2,806 images with 188,282 instances across 15 categories, annotated as: Plane (PL), Baseball Diamond (BD), Bridge (BR), Ground Track Field (GTF), Small Vehicle (SV), Large Vehicle (LV), Ship (SH), Tennis Court (TC), Basketball Court (BC), Storage Tank (ST), Soccer Ball Field (SBF), Roundabout (RA), Ha raroor (HA), Swimming Pool (SP), Heli copotrr (HC). The images range from 800x800 to 4,000x4,000 pixels and exhibit significant variation in scale and orientation.
DOTA-v1.5 extends DOTA-v1.0 by adding annotations for extremely small objects (less than 10 pixels) and introducing new category, Container Crane (CC). It includes a total of 403,318 instances while retaining the same image count and dataset split as DOTA-v1.0.
DOTA-v2.0 further expands the dataset to 11,268 images and 1,793,658 instances, covering 18 cat- egories. Two additional categories, Airport (AP) and Helipad (HP), are introduced, providing more diverse and challenging set of aerial images.
RSAR (Zhang et al., 2025) is a large-scale dataset for rotated object detection in SAR imagery, comprising 95,842 images and 183,534 annotated instances across 6 categories.
SKU110K-R (Pan et al., 2020) is a dataset focused on detecting densely packed retail scenes, con- sisting of 11,762 images and 110,712 annotated objects.
4.2 EXPERIMENTAL SETTINGS
Our implementation is based on the MMRotate library (Zhou et al., 2022). In the pseudo-label generation stage, we train the model for 6 epochs using momentum SGD as the optimizer. We set the weight decay to le-4, with an initial learning rate of 0.005, which decays by a factor of 10 after the thh epoch. The batch size for training is set to 2. For the detector training phase using pseudo- labels, the same detector configurations the default settings in MMRotate. Throughout the entire training process, random flipping is employed as the only data augmentation technique. Our experiments were accelerated using two GeForce RTX 3090 GPUs.
7

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Table 2: Results on DOTA-VI.0/1.5// RSAR and SKUTIOKRR, reporting the mAP metric. FCOSR and ORCNN refer to Rotated FCOS and Oriented R-CNN. indicates using additional human knowledge priors.
Method Point2Mask-RBoo
DOTA-v1.0
DOTA-v1.5
DOTA-v2.0
RSAR
SKU110K-R
9.72
P2BNec+H2RBox
19.63
P2RNat=H2RBox-v2
21.87
Poin2RBBx-RCC
34.07
24.31
14.69
3.41
Poin2RBox-SSK"
40.27
30.51
23.43
PointOBB (FCOSR)
30.08
10.66
5.53
13.80
PointOBB-v2 (FCOSR)
41.68 (-11.60)
30.59 (-19.93)
20.64 (+15:11)
18.99 (65.19)
56.63
PointOBB (ORCNN)
33.31
10.92
6,29
12.30
PointOBB-v2 (URCNN)
41.64 (48.33)
32.01 (-21.99
23.40 (+17.11)
22.61 (+10.31)
62.76
PoinOOBB (Kellet)
33.95
11.24
6.03
PointOBB-v2 (Reieet)
44.85 (+10.90)
36.39 (-25.15)
27.22 (+21.19)
Table 3: Comparison of the training time in pseudo- label generation phase and the accuracy between PointÔBB and PointOBB-v2. The reported mAPs0 is trained with Rotated FCOS.
Table 4: Ablation study with different label assignment strategies.
Pos.
Neg.
Neg.M
mAPs so
23.62
Method
Epochs
Train Hours
mAP50
44.75
PointOBB
24
22.28
30.08
18.21
PointOBB-v2
6
1.43
41.68
44.85
4.3
MAIN RESULTS
Results on DOTA-v1.0. As shown in Tab. 1, our method achieves state-of-the-art performance compared the previous leading approaches, i.c. PointOBB and Point2RBox. Specifically, under three different detectors, our method attains mAP50 scores of 41.68%, 41.64%, and 44.85%, repre- senting improvements of 11.60% 8.33% and 10.90% over PointOBB, respectively. Additionally, when compared to Point2RBox Box-RRBBx-RC which does not incorporate human prior knowledge, our ap- proach achieves a substantial gain of 10.78%. Even when compared with Point2RBox-SP which leverages manual sketches to assist in boundary determination, our method still outperforms it by 4.58%. These results demonstrate the robustness and effectiveness of our approach, even without the need for manual prior knowledge.
Results on DOTA-v1.5/v2.0. Both DOTA-v1.5 and DOTA-v2.0 present higher level difficulty due to the increased number of densely packed and smaller objects. As Tab. 2 shows, method demonstrates sigmificant improvements over other approaches on these more challenging datasets, indicating its strength in handling small and densely distributed objects, attributed the separation mechanism we designed. In comparison to PointOBB, our method achieves substantial gains on both DOTA-v115 and DOTA-v2.0, with greater absolute improvements and higher percentages. For instance, when trained with ReDet, our approach improves by 36.39% on DOTA-v1, and 27.22% on DOTA-v2.0, corresponding 25.15% and 19.19% increases. which surpass the 10.90% improve- ment on DOTA-vI. ... Furthermore, our method consistently outperforms Point2RBox. Even when compared Point2RBox-SK which incorporates human prior knowledge, our method achieves improvements of 1.88%/..79%% on DOTA-vI.5/2..0 respectively.
Computational Cost. Our method is highly lightweight, primarily due its single-branch structure, which eliminates the need for the traditional teacher-student framework. Unlike other methods, we do not require multiple image transformations or consistency constraints within the model. As shown in Tab. 3, the pseudo-label training process for model takes only 1.43 hours, which is 15.58 times faster than the 22.28 hours required by PointOBB.
In terms of memory consumption, such as DOTA-v2.0, our method uses approximately 8GB of memory, making suitable for most GPUs. In contrast, PointOBB faces out-of out-of-memory issues when handling such dense scenes, requir- ing restrictions on the number of Rols to run properly. However, this limitation severely impacts the detector's performance, resulting in numerous small objects being undetected.
approach is also more efficient. For dense object scenarios
8

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Table 5: Ablation study of sample methods. "Probabilistic" means sample according to the CPM probability.
Table 6: Ablation of vector constraint module to handle dense objects. "w" and "w/o" indicate the "with" and "without" the module.
Sample mAPso
Probabilistic
Weighted 44.85
Vector Constraint mAPso
w/o
w 44.85
41.40
27.88
Table 7: Ablation study of the sampling size of PCA.
Table 8: Ablation study point annotations inaceuracy. We report the pseudo-label generation quality (measured by mloU) and detec- tion performance (measured by mAP
Size
mAP30 30
Point
DOTA-v1.0
DOTA-v1.5
DOTA-v2.0
5
43.35
Range
mloU
mAPso
mloU
mAP
mloU
mAPso
7
44.85
45.40
44.85
43.65
36.39
42.91
27.22
9
44.17
10%
42.89
42.30
41.85
34.20
41,46
25.14
11
43.63
20%
40.22
38.46
39.47
30.95
39.30
23.45
Table 9: Comparison of pseudo-label generation quality (measured by mloU) and detection perfor- mance (measured by mAP across different datasets. Additionally. we selected three representa- tive categories- Sm Vehicle (SV), Large Vehicle (LV), and Ship (SH)-which whiih are abundant and exhibit characteristics of small objects and densely packed distributions. mean repre-
sents the average value across all classes in the dataset.
Memory (GB)
mloU
mAPs
Dataset
Method
SV
LV
SH
mean
SV
LV
SH
mean
PointOBB
>44
57.06
49.78
46.59
44.88
59.32
46.06
45.71
33.95
DOTA-v1.0
PointOBB-v v2
5.99
52.74
47.65
48.82
45.40
55.00
49.27
51.77
44.85
PointOBB
>24
9.69
26.58
26.49
30.65
0.01
4.15
11.40
11.24
DOTA-v1.5
PointOBB-v2
7.35
40.42
45.62
49.74
43.65
20.52
42.97
48.53
36.39
PointOBB
>-24
10.01
24.45
21.33
26.63
0.49
1.22
0.36
6.03
DOTA-v2.0
PointOBB-v2
7.67
42.47
48.14
46.45
42.91
20.94
28.76
22.15
27.22
The training stage requires constraining to around 70 Rols; otherwise it results in out-of memory errors.
4.4 ABLATION STUDIES
Label Assignment. Tab. demonstrates the impact of our three label assignment strategies on model performance. In these experiments, different label assignment strategies were used to train and generate the CPM. When specific strategy was applied to define positive and negative samples, the remaining points were ignored during training. We observed that using a simple circular strategy to determine positive samples resulted in only 23.62%. However, by incorporating a more compre- hensive strategy to identify negative samples, the performance increased significantly to 44.75%. Furthermore, assigning middle region between objects to negative (denoted as "Neg./M") yielded a slight improvement, raising the mAP to 44.85%. This underscores the crucial role of the negative label assignment strategy, which contributes greatly to the performance gains.
PCA Sampling Strategy and Size. We conducted ablation experiments on the PCA sampling strat- egy and the range of sampling sizes. As shown in Tab. 5, our weighted method for PCA calculation improves accuracy by 3.45% compared the probabilistic method. We also found that this improve- ment primarily benefits classes with larger aspect ratios, such large vehicles and harbors. This because CPM in elongated objects exhibit sigmificant probability variation along the short axis of their oriented bounding boxes, and probabilistic sample method introduces considerable instability. Additionally, we evaluated the impact of the PCA sampling size. As shown Tab. 7, our method achieves the best performance when the sampling size is set to
Vector Constraint. As shown Tab. 6, applying the vector constraint significantly improves de- tection performance. Through further analysis, we found that the improvement is primarily con- centrated dense object categories, such as small vehicles, large vehicles, and ships. In contrast, sparse categories like harbors and swimming pools are almost unaffected. This observation aligns with the motivation behind the design of this module, which especially addresses densely packed object scenarios.

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
4.5 ANALYSIS
Label Accuracy. Recognizing the potential inaccuracies in human annotations, where the center point might not be perfectly labeled, we conducted experiments by adding noise to the center points to evaluate the robustness of our model. We selected different thresholds a and calculated the object's scale as S wwh. The center points were randomly shifted along a uniformly sampled direction, with the offset distance drawn from a uniform distribution over the range [-a.S, oS]. We observed a slight performance decrease as the center points were perturbed. As Tab. 8 shows, the average mAP dropped by only 2.27% with a 10% shift. Despite this decline, our method still significantly outperforms PointOBB, demonstrating the strong robustness of our model.
Quality of Pseudo Labels. As shown in Tab. 9, our method consistently outperforms PointOBB in generating pseudo labels, with performance gains increasing in more challenging datasets like DOTA-v1.5 and DOTA-v2.0. Specifically, 16.28% across DOTA-v1.0, DOTA-v1.5, and DOTA-v2.0, respectively. Notably, although the im- provement in DOTA-v1.0 is only 0.52%, training the same detector with our pscudo labels yields a nearly 10% increase in mAP compared to PointOBB. As shown in Fig. 5, the first and second columns illustrate that our model learns more accurate object scales, while the third column demon- strates that, unlike PointOBB- method effectively distinguishes between these densely packed objects.
observe mIoU improvements of 0.52%. 13.00%, and
produces overlapping pseudo labels for small vehicles-our our
Dense Object Scenarios. As shown in Tab. 9, we selected three representative categories-Smaa Vehicle (SV), Large Vehicle (LV), and Ship which are characterized by small and densely packed objects. Datasets like DOTA-v1.5 and DOTA-v2.0 introduce a much larger number of these densely packed objects compared DOTA-v1.0. these challenging scenarios, our method significantly outperforms PointOBB. For example, in DOTA-v2.0, our method achieves mean mloU of 42.91 % and mAP of 27.22% whereas PointOBB drops to 26.63% and 6.03% respectively. Visualizations further confirm that our model generates better pseudo labels in dense scenes. In terms of detection results, in the last column of Fig. 5, we show a dense scene with 25 large vehicles, where method detects all of them, while PointOBB identifies only 15.
Limitations. (a) Our method assigns negative samples based on the minimum distance between ob- jects, requiring at least two point annotations per image. In scenarios with extremely sparse objects, may degrade the performance. (b) Some hyperparameters (e.g. the radius in label assignment) are set based on the dataset. They may require adjustments when facing other scenarios.
CONCLUSION
In this paper, we introduced PointOB--v2, a simpler, faster, and stronger approach for single point- supervised oriented object detection. By employing class probability maps and Principal Compo- nent Analysis (PCA) for object orientation and boundary estimation, our method improves detection accuracy while discarding the traditional time- and memory-heavy teacher-student structure. Exper- imental results demonstrate that Poin(OBB-v2 consistently outperforms the previous state-of-the- art across multiple datasets, achieving a training speed 15.58x faster and accuracy improvements on the DOTA-v1.00 1.t.vvl.001..5/2..000 datasets, with notable gains in small and densely packed object scenarios. Our method achieves a substantial speedup and accuracy boost while using less memory, showcasing its effectiveness for real-world applications.
of 1 11.60%
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 621761334 134, by research and application on AI technologies for smart mobility funded by SAIC Motor, and by a grant from the Institute Guo Qiang (2019GQG0002), Tsinghua University.
This work was also supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant No. 62306069.
10

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
REFERENCES
Guangming Cao, Xuchui Yu. Wenwen Yu, Xumeng Han, Xue Yang, Guorong Li, Jianbin Jiao, and Zhenjun Han. P2rbox: Point prompt oriented object detection with SAM. arXiv preprint 1xXiv:2311.13122 2024.
Pengfei Chen, Xuehui Yu, Xumeng Han, Najmul Hassan, Kai Wang, Jiachen Li, Jian Zhao, Humphrey Shi, Zhenjun Han, and Qixiang Ye. Point-to-box network for accurate object detection via single point supervision. European Conference on Computer Vision, 2022.
Jian Ding, Nan Xue, Yang Long, Gui-Song Xia, and Qikai Lu. Learning roi transformer for oriented object detection in acrial images. In IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 2849-2858, 2019.
Shuyong Gao, Wei Zhang. Yan Wang, Qianyu Guo, Chenglong Zhang, Yangji He, and Wenqiang Zhang. suakry--upervised salient object detection using point supervision. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 36, pp. 670-678, 2022.
Jiaming Han, Jian Ding, Nan Xue, and Gui-Song Xia. Redet: rotation-equivariant detector for aerial object detection. In IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 2785-27944 2021. doi: 10.1 2000//CCPR4444.222..000000
Jiaming Han, Jian Ding, Jie Li, and Gui-Song Xia. Align deep features for oriented object detection. IEEE Transactions Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 60:1-11, 2022. doi: 10. 10.11000 10.1109/TGRS. 2021 10022406
Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recog- nition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp- 770-778, 2016.
Liping Hou, Ke Lu, Xue Yang, Yuqiu Li, and Jian Xue. G-rep: Gaussian representation for arbitrary- oriented object detection. Remote Sensing, 15(3):757, 2023.
Javed Iqbal, Muhammad Akhtar Munir, Arif Mahmood, Afsheen Rafaqat Ali, and Mohsen Ali. Leveraging orientation for weakly supervised object detection with application to firearm local- ization. Neurocomputiigg 440:310-320, 2021. ISSN 0925-2312. doi: https://oi..og orr.:i/.0///111/////
neucom.2021.01.075.
Alexander Kirillov, Eric Mintun, Nikhila Ravi, Hanzi Mao, Chloe Rolland, Laura Gustafson, Tete Xiao, Spencer Whitehead, Alexander Berg, Wan-Yen Yen Lo, et al. Segment anything. In Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference Computer Vision, pp. 4015-4026, 2023.
Wentong Li, Yijie Chen, Kaixuan Hu, and Jianke Zhu, Oriented reppoints for aerial object detection. In IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1829-1838, 2022.
Wentong Li, Yuqian Yuan, Song Wang, Jianke Zhu, Jianshu Li, Jian Liu, and Lei Zhang- Point2mask: Point-supervised panoptic segmentation via optimal transport. In IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision, 2023.
Tsung- Yi Lin, Piotr Dollár, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, Bharath Hariharan, and Serge Belongie. Feature pyramid networks for object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference com- puter vision and pattern recognition, pp. 2117-2125, 2017.
Tsung-Y Yi Lin, Priya Goyal, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, and Piotr Dollár. Focal loss for dense object detection. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 42(2))318- 327, 2020. doi: 00.1109/TPAML2218
Li Liu, Wanli Ouyang, Xiaogang Wang, Paul Fieguth, Jie Chen, Xinwang Liu, and Matti Pietikäinen. Deep learning for generic object detection: A survey, International Journal of Computer Vision, 128(2):211-31. 2020.
Nanqing Liu, Xun Xu, Yongyi Su, Haojie Zhang, and Heng-Chao Li. Pointsam: Pointly-supervised segment anything model for remote sensing images. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409. 2024.
11

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Junwei Luo, Xue Yang. Yi Yu, Qingyun Li, Junchi Yan, and Yansheng Li. Pointobb: Learning oriented object detection via single point supervision. In IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024.
Jeffri Mlurugarra-Lerenn Lucas N Kirsten, Luis Felipe Zeni, and Claudio R Jung. Probabilistic intersection-over -overcttion-vv---niion for training and evaluation of oriented object detectors. IEEE Transac- fions on Image Processing, 2024.
Xingjia Pan, Yuqiang Ren, Kekai Sheng, Weiming Dong, Haolei Yuan, Xiaowei Guo, Chongyang Ma, and Changsheng Xu. Dynamic refinement network for oriented and densely packed object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recogni- fion, pp. 11207-11216, 2020.
Wen Qian, Xue Yang, Silong Peng, Junchi Yan, and Yue Guo. Learning modulated loss for rotated object detection. In AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 35, pp. 2458 22686,2666662 2021.
Yongqing Sun, Jie Ran, Feng Yang, Chenqiang Gao, Takayuki Kurozumi, Hideaki Kimata, and Ziqi Ye. Oriented object detection for remote sensing images based on weakly supervised learning. In IEEE International Conference Multimedia & Expo Workshops, pp. 1-6, 2021.
Zhi Tian, Chunhua Shen, Hao Chen, and Tong He. Feos: Fully convolutional one-stage object detection. In IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 9626-9635, 2019. doi: 10. 10.110//CCV22211..0092
Linfei Wang, Yibing Zhan, Xu Lin, Baosheng Yu, Liang Ding, Jianqing Zhu, and Dapeng Tao. rotated object detection.
Explicit and implicit box equivariance learning for IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence, 2024.
Long Wen, Yu Cheng, Yi Fang, and Xinyu Li. A comprehensive survey of oriented object detection in remote sensing images. Expert Systems with Applications, pp. 119960, 2023.
Gui-Song Xia, Xiang Bai, Jian Ding, Zhen Zhu, Serge Belongie, Jiebo Luo, Mihai Dateu, Marcello Pelillo, and Liangpei Zhang. Dota: A large-scale dataset for object detection in aerial images, In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 3974-3983, 2018.
Xingxing Xie, Gong Cheng, Jiabao Wang, Xiwen Yao, and Junwei Han. Oriented r-cnn for object detection. In IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 3520-3529, 2021.
Xue Yang and Junchi Yan. Arbirrary-oriented object detection with circular smooth label. In Euro- pean Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 677-694, 2020.
Xue Yang and Junchi Yan. On the arbitrary-oriented object detection: Classification based ap- proaches revisited. International Journal of Computer Vision, 13005)::340-1335. 2022.
Xue Yang, Hao Sun, Kun Fu, Jirui Yang. Xian Sun. Menglong Yan, and Zhi Guo. Automatic ship detection in remote sensing images from google earth of complex scenes based on multiscale rotation dense feature pyramid networks. Remote sensing, 10(1):132, 2018.
Xue Yang. Jirui Yang, Junchi Yan, Yue Zhang, Tengfei Zhang, Zhi Guo, Xian Sun, and Kun Fu. Scrdet: Towards more robust detection for small, cluttered and rotated objects. In IEEF/CVF International Conference Computer Vision, pp. 00832.
2019a. doi: 10.1109/ICCV.2019.
Xue Yang. Liping Hou, Yue Zhou, Wentao Wang, and Junchi Yan. Dense label encoding for bound- ary discontinuity free rotation detection. In JEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition, pp. 15814-15824, 2021a. doi: 10. M09/CVVR4443.22221.11
Xue Yang, Junchi Yan, Ziming Feng, and Tao He. R3det: Refined single-stage detector with feature refinement for rotating object. In AAA! Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 35, pp. 3163-3171, b021b. 2021b.
12

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
Xue Yang, Junchi Yan, Ming Qi, Wentao Wang, Xiaopeng Zhang, and Tian Qi. Rethinking rotated object detection with gaussian wasserstein distance loss. In 38th International Conference on Machine Learning, volume 139, pp. 11800-18841, 2021c.
Xue Yang, Xiaojiang Yang, Jirui Yang, Qi Ming, Wentao Wang, Qi Tian, and Junchi Yan. Learn- ing high-precision bounding box for rotated object detection via kullback-leibler divergence. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 34, pp. 18381-183241 2021d.
Xue Yang, Junchi Yan, Wenlong Liao, Xiaokang Yang, Jin Tang. and Tao He. Scrdet++: Detecting small, cluttered and rotated objects via instance-level feature denoising and rotation loss smooth- ing. IEEE Trunsactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(2):2384-2399) 2022.
Xue Yang, Gefan Zhang, Wentong Li, Xuehui Wang. Yue Zhou, and Junchi Yan. H2rbox: Horizontal box annotation is all you need for oriented object detection. International Conference Learning Representations, 2023a.
Xue Yang, Gefan Zhang, Xiaojiang Yang, Yue Zhou, Wentao Wang, Jin Tang, Tao He, and Junchi Yan. Detecting rotated objects as gaussian distributions and its 3-d generalization. IEEE Trans- actions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(4):4335 4354, 2023b.
Xue Yang. Yue Zhou, Gefan Zhang, Jirui Yang, Wentao Wang, Junchi Yan, Xiaopeng Zhang, and Qi Tian. The kfiou loss for rotated object detection. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023c.
Ze Yang. Shaohui I. Liu, Han Hu, Liwei Wang, and Stephen Lin. Reppoints: Point representation for object detection. In /EEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 9656-9665, 2019b. doi: 10.1 10.100//CC.2201.0009977
Yi Yu and Feipeng Da. Phase-shifting coder: Predicting accurate orientation in oriented object detection. In IEEF/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023.
Yi Yu, Xue Yang. Qingyun Li, Yue Zhou, Feipeng Da, and Junchi Yan. H2rbox-v2: Incorporating symmetry for boosting horizontal box supervised oriented object detection. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023.
Yi Yu, Xue Yang. Qingyun Li, Feipeng Da, Jifeng Dai, Yu Qiao, and Junchi Yan. Point2rbox: Combine knowledge from synthetic visual patterns for end-to-end oriented object detection with single point supervision. In IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024.
Shun Zhang, Jihui Long, Yaohui Xu, and Shaohui Mei. Pmho: Point-supervised oriented object detection based on segmentation-drive proposal generation. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024.
Xin Zhang, Xue Yang, Yuxuan Li, Jian Yang, Ming-Ming Cheng, and Xiang Li. Rsar: Restricted state angle resolver and rotated sar benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.0444 2025.
Zhong-Qii Qiu Zhao, Peng Zheng, Shou-Tao Xu, and Xindong Wu. Object detection with deep learning: A review. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, (O(11):3212322 2019. doi: 1111009NNNLS.008.222828
Yue Zhou, Xue Yang, Gefan Zhang. Jiabao Wang, Yanyi Liu, Liping Hou, Xue Jiang, Xingzhao Liu, Junchi Yan, Chengqi Lyu, et al. Mmrotate: A rotated object detection benchmark using pytorch. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pp. 7331-7334, 2022.
Tianyu Zhu, Bryce Ferenezi, Pulak Purkait, Tom Drummond, Hamid Rezatofighi, and Anton van den Hengel. Knowledge combination to learn rotated detection without rotated annotation. In IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023.
13

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
7 APPENDIX
7.1 NEGATIVE LABEL ASSIGNMENT
To further compare our dynamic minimum radius circle-based strategy for defining negative samples with the fixed radius circle- based strategy, trained the CPM using both strategies and visualized the results. As shown in Fig. 4, our method better captures the contours of an object, whereas the fixed radius approach produces CPM that resembles circle centered the object, with less distinct contours. This lack of clarity in the contours makes it difficult for PCA to accurately determine the orientation and boundaries based on the CPM.
Original Image
Ours Label Assignment
Fixed Negative Radius
Original Image
Ours Label Assignment
Fixed Negative Radius
Figure 4: Visualization of the class probability map (CPM). Our dynamic radius negative label as- signment fixed radius negative label assignment. Our method produces clearer object contours, whereas the fixed radius approach generates contours that are approximately circular, with the re- sulting CPM primarily concentrated around the object's center.
7.2 ROBUSTNESS OF CPM'S PARAMETER SELECTION
We conducted experiments on the DOTA dataset, focusing on parameters that could potentially im- pact the results (a, bl, b2), and observed minimal fluctuations in the final results. Additionally, the performance consistently exceeded that of PointOBB (33.31%) by significant margin (minimum 7% gain Oriented RCNN). Therefore, we conclude that the introduced thresholds do not require precise tuning to achieve strong performance, indicating that the model is not highly sensitive to threshold settings.
Table 10: The performance of method under different parameter choices.
Parameters Choice
mAPso (Oriented RCNN)
a, bi, b2 = -1,6,4 (Result in Tab. I)
41.64
a, b1, b2 00.6,884
41.33
a, bj. b2 1,8,4
40.68
a, ,b, 62 1.5.8,4
40.22
a, b,, b2 1.5.6.
41.95
a, by. by 0.67, 12,
41.74
14

---

Published as a conference paper at ICLR 2025
PoinOOBB
PointOBB-v2
Generated Psaudo Labels (Train Set)
Detection Results (Test Set)
Visualization of pseudo-labels and detection results from our model compared to PointOBB. For clarity, label texts for dense objects are hidden.
Figure 5:
7.3 VISUALIZATION
We visualize the quality of pseudo labels and detection results generated by our method compared to PointOBB. As shown in Figure 5, our method generates more precise object scales for pseudo labels and performs better in dense object scenarios, where PointOBB often produces overlapping pscudo labels. In terms of detection results, as seen in the fourth column, approach produces bounding boxes with more accurate scales and fewer false detections. In the last column, we demonstrate dense scenario with 25 large vehicles, where our method detects all of them, while PointOBB identifies only 15.
7.4 DISCUSSION ON ANNOTATION COST VS PERFORMANCE GAP TO FULL-SUPERVISION ACCURACY
In the field of object detection, the cost of point annotations is about 36.5% lower than HBB and 104.8% lower than OBB, and the efficiency of labeling point significantly higher than both HBB and OBB. This cost analysis has also been adopted and validated in prior works, such as H2RBox (Yang et al., 2023a), PointOBB (Luo et al., 2024), and Point2RBox (Yu et al., 2024), further demonstrating its reliability and relevance.
7.5 SOME IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS CPM GENERATION MODULE
The activation function used in the middle layers is LeakyReLU, while the last layer employs sigmoid function. For each point, we first generate its target using label assignment strategy. Subsequently, we train the CPM using focal loss (Lin et al., 2020).
15


Reviews:
[{"review_id": "DxKGsDaqV8", "reviewer": "Reviewer_TgZt", "summary": "This paper improves PointOBB, an existing weakly supervised oriented object detection method. Oriented object detection is important for analyzing aerial and satellite imagery. The cost of annotation, especially when you want to draw oriented boxes, is high. This paper (and, previously, PointOBB) proposes to annotate an object with just a single point, which is an easier annotation method. The proposed method first generates a class probability map, which creates positive and negative regions. Then, a PCA based analysis is done to estimate principal axes of objects to generate rotated boxes as pseudo annotation. Authors report improved performance over PointBB on the DOTA datasets.", "questions": "- What are the annotation costs for full annotation and single point? How do they compare? Is low performance worth the reduced annotation  cost? \n- How does PointOBBv2 perform on DIOR-R and other oriented object detection datasets?\n\n\n## Post-rebuttal edit: \n\nThe authors provided satisfactory answers to my questions above. They promise to include these answers in the final version of the paper.", "limitations": "", "rating": 6, "confidence": 3, "soundness": 3, "presentation": 2, "contribution": 3, "strengths": "Performance improvement over the baseline is impressive. Also, the proposed method is 15x faster to train.", "weaknesses": "The proposed method (i) is a simple increment to PointOBB and (ii) involves many thresholds, indicating that it might not be an easily generalizable one: \n\n(i) The method boils down to class probability map (CPM) and PCA.  CPM is a simple positive/negative segmentation. \n\n(ii) The method has at least 6 thresholds: radius b1 (L244), radius b2 (L262), multiplier to radius (L254), and three others at lines 209, 307 and 320. This suggests that the method is fragile and not easily generalizable to new datasets. I believe it is the authors' responsibility to show that their method is generalizable. Yet, results are reported only on the DOTA dataset. \n\n\nThe main claim of the paper is that they can do oriented object detection with weak supervision (single point per object). This is good but the performance (around 45)  is drastically behind the fully supervised methods (https://paperswithcode.com/sota/oriented-object-detection-on-dota-1-0), which is around high 70s. So, I think, it  is reasonable to expect a discussion on full annotation cost vs performance degradation. However, none is provided.", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "extra_scores": {}}, {"review_id": "T9h8uJvEaS", "reviewer": "Reviewer_ND69", "summary": "In this paper, the authors propose a single point supervised oriented object detection method called PointOBB-v2, which can generate pseudo rotated boxes from points without relying on any other prior. Compared with PointOBB, PointOBB-v2 introduces a novel pipeline to improve the accuracy and generation speed of the pseudo-label. Extensive experiments on the DOTA-v1.0/v1.5/v2.0 demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.", "questions": "See the Weaknesses section.", "limitations": "", "rating": 8, "confidence": 4, "soundness": 4, "presentation": 4, "contribution": 3, "strengths": "1. The paper is innovative, well-organized, and well-written.\n2. The proposed method is an improvement of the structure of PointOBB. \n3. The authors conduct comprehensive experiments to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.", "weaknesses": "1. In related work, it is better to provide a summary of the methods described in section 2.1.\n2. The authors conduct experiments on DOTA datasets. How about the effectiveness of the proposed method on other datasets with different object categories and data distributions, such as DIOR?", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "extra_scores": {}}, {"review_id": "pLKs1v9JaS", "reviewer": "Reviewer_GcxK", "summary": "The paper presents PointOBB-v2, a faster and more accurate method for single-point supervised oriented object detection that improves upon PointOBB. By generating a Class Probability Map (CPM) with targeted sampling and applying Principal Component Analysis (PCA), PointOBB-v2 effectively estimates object orientation and boundaries without relying on pre-trained models. An added separation mechanism enhances performance in high-density scenarios. PointOBB-v2 achieves 15.58x faster training and significant accuracy gains on DOTA datasets, marking a new state-of-the-art in this domain.", "questions": "Please check the weaknesses.\n\n## Justification\n\nThis paper presents notable advancements in point-supervised oriented object detection, but key limitations reduce its impact. The explanation of the CPM’s effectiveness is incomplete, particularly regarding how it generates clear object contours from coarse labels. While strong in experimental results, the paper would benefit from clearer methodology. \n\nMy initial rating is weak reject. I will finalize the rating after a discussion with the authors and other reviewers.", "limitations": "", "rating": 6, "confidence": 4, "soundness": 3, "presentation": 2, "contribution": 3, "strengths": "## 1. Significant Contribution to Point-Supervised Oriented Object Detection\n\nThis paper presents a notable advancement in point-supervised oriented object detection, achieving improvements in both accuracy and training efficiency.\n\n## 2. Comprehensive Experimental Analysis\n\nThe authors provide a thorough evaluation of the proposed method, including detailed ablation studies that effectively demonstrate its efficacy. The method is validated across three aerial image datasets, further underscoring its robustness and applicability.", "weaknesses": "## 1. Incomplete Explanation of the Class Probability Map (CPM)\n\n- While the overall pipeline of PointOBB-v2 is generally understandable from L.198-211, the crucial workings of the CPM remain unclear. \n- Specifically, key details about CPM training are omitted, including the training objective, activation function, and handling of ignored labels.\n- The current structure of the Method section adds to the confusion. Section 3.1 describes CPM generation process, followed by Section 3.2, which outlines label assignment. (The first Section 3.1 assumes that we already have the completed CPM generation model, but the readers cannot understand how it can work.)\n- Reordering these sections (such as by first describing the model training or merging both subsection) could enhance clarity.\n\n\n## 2. Limited Justification for the Effectiveness of CPM\n\n- The paper lacks convincing arguments for why the CPM functions effectively. For instance, the use of a fixed radius for positive and negative sampling lacks a clear rationale, particularly in how it helps define object contours.\n- Sections 3.1 and 3.2 provide limited insight into how the model generates a CPM with distinct object regions.\n- Figure 2, which illustrates the “Training Target” and the “Output CPM”, raises questions about how the model achieves such precise CPM output even when trained on such coarse training labels. Additional explanation on this discrepancy would be valuable.\n- Further clarity on Figure 2 would be beneficial: is the red dot an output from the model or a manual illustration? Similarly, the meanings of colors in Figure 3 (blue, pink, and orange) should be clarified.\n\n## 3. Generalization to Other Oriented Object Detection Scenarios\n- While the method appears well-suited for densely packed object scenarios (e.g., aerial or retail images), it’s uncertain whether it generalizes to other tasks, such as text detection. Despite aiming to contribute to general object detection, the experiments are limited to remote sensing images, a subset of oriented object detection.\n\n\n## Additional Comment\n\n- The concept of CPM bears resemblance to the existing method TricubeNet [A], which, although fully supervised, also represents objects within a 2D map. A brief discussion of the similarities and distinctions between these approaches could enhance the paper’s context.\n\n[A] TricubeNet: 2D Kernel-Based Object Representation for Weakly-Occluded Oriented Object Detection (WACV 2022)", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "extra_scores": {}}, {"review_id": "u1l6twztMR", "reviewer": "Reviewer_qP7C", "summary": "In this paper, PointOBB-v2 is proposed for point-supervised oriented object detection. The authors introduce the learning of Class Probability Map and use Principal Component Analysis to determine the size and rotation of objects. By employing these paradigms, the capability of the PointOBB-v2 is enhanced and significantly outperforms the PointOBB baselines.", "questions": "1. What does “the randomness introduced by sampling can cause variance in the result from a single pass” in Line 288 mean? Where does the randomness come from? \n2. Table 2 shows that the improvement on the challenge datasets (DOTA-v1.5/v2.0) is more pronounced compared to DOTA-v1.0. What might account for this difference?", "limitations": "", "rating": 8, "confidence": 5, "soundness": 3, "presentation": 3, "contribution": 3, "strengths": "1. The research topic of point-supervised oriented object detection is meaningful and challenging, and the paper is clear and well-organized.\n2. As a new version of existing work (PointOBB), the comparison between them is essential. The experiments show the proposed method outperforms the PointOBB baselines in both training speed and accuracy by a considerable amount.", "weaknesses": "1. Since the authors use “the highest resolution feature map of the FPN”, it is not clear whether the resolution while learning the CPM affects the performance. \n2. There are some minor issues: Please check Figure 2, Line 433, and Line 468. Some equations end with a period, while others end with a comma. Please ensure they are consistent.", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "extra_scores": {}}, {"review_id": "W6VRZv2HMv", "reviewer": "Reviewer_R8EQ", "summary": "This paper presents PointOBB-v2, a novel approach for single point supervised oriented object detection, aimed at providing a simpler, faster, and stronger methodology compared to its predecessor, PointOBB. Specifically, PointOBB-v2 generates Class Probability Maps (CPM) using a positive and negative sample assignment strategy, which helps to capture the approximate contours of objects. To accurately estimate orientation and boundaries, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is employed, providing a lightweight approach that avoids the need for prior deep network components or cumbersome teacher-student training frameworks. Experiments show that  PointOBB-v2 significantly improves pseudo-label generation efficiency, achieving a 15.58-fold increase in speed and reduced memory consumption while maintaining superior accuracy.", "questions": "1. The paper mentions improved performance in high-density scenarios, but what specific attributes of PointOBB-v2 contribute most to these improvements?\n2. Why was Principal Component Analysis (PCA) specifically chosen to estimate object orientation and boundary? Could other methods, such as clustering algorithms or deep learning-based orientation estimation, have been a better alternative? What are the trade-offs?", "limitations": "", "rating": 8, "confidence": 5, "soundness": 3, "presentation": 3, "contribution": 4, "strengths": "1. The primary contributions of PointOBB-v2 are its significant speed and efficiency improvements. The pseudo-label generation process is 15.58 times faster, and memory consumption is considerably reduced, requiring only around 8GB of GPU memory, compared to the previous version that faced significant out-of-memory issues. It also achieves higher accuracy on DOTA-v1.0/1.5/2.0 compared to PointOBB,  particularly in dense scenarios. \n2. The experimental section of the paper demonstrates a comprehensive evaluation of PointOBB-v2, including comparisons across multiple versions of the DOTA dataset (v1.0, v1.5, and v2.0). The authors present quantitative results that highlight consistent improvements in accuracy and efficiency over the predecessor, PointOBB. The experimental setup effectively uses multiple detectors and datasets to validate the proposed method’s robustness and adaptability, particularly in dense object detection scenarios.\n3. The manuscript is well-structured, with a logical flow that clearly explains the motivation, methodology, and outcomes. The authors effectively contextualize their work within the existing literature, highlighting the gap in current oriented object detection approaches and positioning PointOBB-v2 as an advancement in this domain.", "weaknesses": "1. The paper focuses primarily on aerial imagery datasets, and it is not entirely clear how well PointOBB-v2 would generalize to other domains such as autonomous vehicles or medical imaging. Although the aerial domain has its unique characteristics, a brief discussion or experiment on a different type of dataset could help demonstrate the method's broader applicability and flexibility.\n2. There are still some grammatical issues in this paper that could be improved. In \"Diverse from those approaches relying on one-shot samples,\" the phrase \"Diverse from\" is slightly awkward. Consider changing it to \"Unlike approaches that rely on one-shot samples.\" Also, in \"achieving significant improvements in the accuracy and generation speed of the pseudo-label, and improving memory efficiency,\" \"improving\" is repetitive here. Consider rewriting it as \"achieving significant improvements in pseudo-label accuracy, generation speed, and memory efficiency.\"", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "extra_scores": {}}, {"review_id": "xr6YEIf4in", "reviewer": "Reviewer_oGEA", "summary": "This paper begins with a comprehensive review of existing point-supervised methods, examining their relative merits with particular emphasis on the limitations of the state-of-the-art approach, PointOBB in Modular WOOD. The key limitations identified include: 1) inefficient pseudo-label generation, 2) excessive GPU memory consumption, and 3) frequent memory overflow issues during RoI proposal generation.\nTo overcome these limitations, the authors introduce PointOBB-v2, which presents a streamlined pipeline that eliminates the traditional teacher-student architecture. Instead, it employs class probability maps exclusively for precise object contour generation, incorporating efficient Principal Component Analysis (PCA) for object orientation and boundary determination. Additionally, the study proposes a novel vector constraint mechanism for enhanced detection of small objects in high-density scenarios.\nExperimental results reveal substantial improvements in pseudo-label generation speed, memory efficiency, and detection performance.", "questions": "1. Please explicitly present the objective function of CPM.\n2.  The paper adopts an independent approach for pseudo-label generation and detector training, unlike the conventional semi-supervised teacher-student framework which enables dynamic pseudo-label updates. Please explain it.\n3. While identical labels are assigned to positive samples of the same target. Why does the Class Probability Map (CPM) assign higher probabilities to regions surrounding the object centers and along their axes?\n4. Please explain the term 'ignored' in Figure 2.\n5. Please discuss the hyper parameters ( the radius and α ) in label assignment.", "limitations": "", "rating": 6, "confidence": 4, "soundness": 3, "presentation": 3, "contribution": 3, "strengths": "1. The solution proposed by the authors is well-described and well-supported by experimental results. \n2. The paper is easy to follow.\n3. The experiments are conducted four datasets of this field.\n4. The paper is well-organized, with a clear flow from introduction to conclusion.", "weaknesses": "1. While the paper demonstrates the empirical effectiveness of PointOBB-v2, it could benefit from providing more theoretical justification or intuition behind the design choices, such as the label assignment strategy and the selection of hyperparameters.\n2. The authors acknowledge that some hyperparameters, such as the radius in label assignment, are set based on the dataset. While this approach yields strong results on the tested datasets, it may require manual tuning when applied to new scenarios, potentially limiting the method's adaptability.\n3.  Although the paper discusses the advantages of modular approaches' flexibility over end-to-end architectures, this method inherently constrains the dynamic updating of pseudo-labels during detector training—a crucial technique that has demonstrated significant efficacy in semi-supervised learning frameworks.", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "extra_scores": {}}]

Author rebuttal:

Decision: Accept (Poster)