Daily Papers

In this report, we present RT-DETRv2, an improved Real-Time DEtection TRansformer (RT-DETR). RT-DETRv2 builds upon the previous state-of-the-art real-time detector, RT-DETR, and opens up a set of bag-of-freebies for flexibility and practicality, as well as optimizing the training strategy to achieve enhanced performance. To improve the flexibility, we suggest setting a distinct number of sampling points for features at different scales in the deformable attention to achieve selective multi-scale feature extraction by the decoder. To enhance practicality, we propose an optional discrete sampling operator to replace the grid_sample operator that is specific to RT-DETR compared to YOLOs. This removes the deployment constraints typically associated with DETRs. For the training strategy, we propose dynamic data augmentation and scale-adaptive hyperparameters customization to improve performance without loss of speed. Source code and pre-trained models will be available at https://github.com/lyuwenyu/RT-DETR.

Enhancing the network architecture of the YOLO framework has been crucial for a long time, but has focused on CNN-based improvements despite the proven superiority of attention mechanisms in modeling capabilities. This is because attention-based models cannot match the speed of CNN-based models. This paper proposes an attention-centric YOLO framework, namely YOLOv12, that matches the speed of previous CNN-based ones while harnessing the performance benefits of attention mechanisms. YOLOv12 surpasses all popular real-time object detectors in accuracy with competitive speed. For example, YOLOv12-N achieves 40.6% mAP with an inference latency of 1.64 ms on a T4 GPU, outperforming advanced YOLOv10-N / YOLOv11-N by 2.1%/1.2% mAP with a comparable speed. This advantage extends to other model scales. YOLOv12 also surpasses end-to-end real-time detectors that improve DETR, such as RT-DETR / RT-DETRv2: YOLOv12-S beats RT-DETR-R18 / RT-DETRv2-R18 while running 42% faster, using only 36% of the computation and 45% of the parameters. More comparisons are shown in Figure 1.