Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In pork pre-packaging lines, the recognized cut type determines the packaging material and line branching, but detection is challenged by deformable tissue, dense crowding, a fixed industrial background, and strict latency limits. At the same input resolution and latency, the transformer-based RT-DETR-L localized cuts more accurately than the convolutional EfficientDet-D3, whereas EfficientDet-D3 missed fewer cuts at matched precision for every seed, although not significantly. EfficientDet-D3 also showed spatial activation leakage toward fixed background structures. To suppress it at no inference cost, we propose an EigenCAM-guided two-stage weight decay control protocol: Stage 1 defines a transition zone of the weight decay coefficient λ solely from the validation-set target activation ratio (TAR), and Stage 2 optimizes the training schedule within it; the zone was reproduced across three seeds. At unchanged latency and accuracy (test mAP50 0.984 ± 0.008 vs. 0.978 ± 0.004), the selected configuration raised TAR (0.24 → 0.43, three-seed mean; not significant, p = 0.14) and, for seed 42, reduced activation on background structures (1.56 → 1.18). On YOLOv8-L and YOLOv9-C, the procedure defined model-specific zones and raised TAR (single runs), while detection gains came mainly from the schedule. The contribution is a validation-set procedure that bounds the λ search by TAR rather than by detection metrics and diagnoses background leakage, not an accuracy gain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Park et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: