Identifying potential objects is critical for object recognition and analysis across various computer vision applications. Existing methods typically localize potential objects by relying on exemplar images, predefined categories, or textual descriptions. However, their reliance on image and text prompts often limits flexibility, restricting adaptability in real-world scenarios. In this paper, we introduce a novel Prompt-Free Universal Region Proposal Network (PF-RPN), which identifies potential objects without relying on external prompts. First, the Sparse Image-Aware Adapter (SIA) module performs initial localization of potential objects using a learnable query embedding dynamically updated with visual features. Next, the Cascade Self-Prompt (CSP) module identifies the remaining potential objects by leveraging the self-prompted learnable embedding, autonomously aggregating informative visual features in a cascading manner. Finally, the Centerness-Guided Query Selection (CG-QS) module facilitates the selection of high-quality query embeddings using a centerness scoring network. Our method can be optimized with limited data (e.g., 5% of MS COCO data) and applied directly to various object detection application domains for identifying potential objects without fine-tuning, such as underwater object detection, industrial defect detection, and remote sensing image object detection. Experimental results across 19 datasets validate the effectiveness of our method. Code is available at https://github.com/tangqh03/PF-RPN.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Existing visual/text prompt based OVD methods typically rely on predefined categories or exemplar images to propose potential objects for the target image. Recent prompt-free OVD methods often leverage VLMs to generate textual descriptions for the target image to localize potential objects which introduce considerable latency costs. In contrast, our PF-RPN doesn’t require any external prompts and only utilizes visual features to generate high-quality proposals. Experimental results show the effectiveness of our PF-RPN in localizing potential objects.
Figure 2: Overall architecture of our PF-RPN. It comprises three core components: (1) the Sparse Image-Aware Adapter (SIA) module, which adaptively integrates multi-level feature maps FiI with a learnable embedding FT via a routing mechanism and cross-attention; (2) the Cascade Self-Prompt (CSP) module, which iteratively refines the embedding through masked average pooling across multiple visual levels; and (3) the Centerness-Guided Query Selection (CG-QS) module, which decodes the features into final predictions optimized by contrastive, regression, and centerness losses.
Datasets
Methods
Prompt Free
AR100
AR300
AR900
ARs
ARm
ARl
GDINO † [ 26 ]
✗
52.9
53.5
54.7
31.1
41.6
63.9
GDINO ‡ [ 26 ]
✓
54.7
57.8
61.6
34.1
49.3
67.0
YOLOE-v8-L † [ 40 ]
✗
44.4
46.2
47.1
21.6
36.6
54.9
YWorldv8-L † [ 6 ]
✗
49.6
51.1
51.6
25.1
42.7
60.6
Qwen-VL † [ 2 ]
✗
20.1
20.1
20.1
1.0
3.0
26.5
GLIP † [ 21 ]
✗
47.6
47.6
47.6
21.2
34.6
56.0
Table 1: Comparison with OVD models, MLLMs, and RPNs. The best results are highlighted in bold . AR100/300/900 denotes the average recall under 100/300/900 candidate boxes, respectively, and ARs/m/l denotes the average recall for small/medium/large objects. † indicates using the original class names from the corresponding dataset as text input, and ‡ indicates replacing the original class names with “object” to obtain a prompt-free setting. Our method achieves the best performance on both the CD-FSOD and ODinW13 benchmarks.
Figure 3: Effect of iterations in the Cascade Self-Prompt module. Visualization of region selection across different Cascade Self-Prompt iterations. Green points indicate the object regions selected by the model in the current iteration. As the number of iterations increases, the model progressively selects more object regions in the image, demonstrating the effectiveness of our cascade self-prompt mechanism.
Figure 4: Effect of the Sparse Image-Aware Adapter. Visualization of similarity heatmaps between the learnable embedding and image features before and after the module update. Each pair of heatmaps (top: before, bottom: after) corresponds to the same image. After the update, the learnable embedding exhibits stronger responses in semantically relevant regions, indicating improved alignment between visual and learned representations and providing a stronger prior for the cascade self-prompt module.
SIA
CSP
CG-QS
AR100
AR300
AR900
ARs
ARm
ARl
×
×
×
52.9
53.5
54.7
31.1
41.6
63.9
✓
×
×
57.8
63.1
66.7
47.9
58.2
77.5
×
✓
×
58.1
62.9
65.8
37.7
56.7
77.0
×
×
✓
54.4
56.9
60.2
21.9
50.6
79.8
✓
×
✓
60.2
64.7
68.0
47.1
60.7
79.1
×
✓
✓
59.6
64.3
67.3
45.2
60.6
78.1
Table 2: Results of module ablation studies. SIA denotes the Sparse Image-Aware Adapter, CSP denotes the Cascade Self-Prompt module and CG-QS denotes the Centerness-Guided Query Selection module. The best results are highlighted in bold .
COCO
IN
AR100
AR300
AR900
ARs
ARm
ARl
1%
0
57.2
63.7
68.0
42.2
60.9
76.6
5%
0
58.8
64.1
67.8
40.2
59.0
78.6
10%
0
59.0
64.1
67.5
38.9
59.1
78.9
1%
5%
59.1
63.3
66.8
36.2
59.9
79.8
5%
5%
60.7
65.3
68.2
38.5
61.9
80.3
10%
5%
60.9
65.5
68.5
39.6
61.6
80.5
Table 3: Results of data ablation studies. COCO denotes the COCO dataset and IN denotes the ImageNet dataset, The best results are highlighted in bold .
Method
AR100
AR300
AR900
ARs
ARm
ARl
GDINO (SwinB)
52.9
53.5
54.7
31.1
41.6
63.9
+ ours
60.7
65.3
68.2
38.5
61.9
80.3
GDINO (ResNet50)
40.4
43.4
44.6
21.7
32.5
54.9
+ ours
45.6
51.4
58.0
28.1
50.6
73.7
Table 4: Results with different backbones. The best results for each baseline are highlighted in bold . Our model effectively improves the performance of detectors with different backbone.
Dataset
Method
AR100
AR300
AR900
ARs
ARm
ARl
w/o MoE
58.6
61.2
63.5
37.1
56.5
73.5
CD-FSOD
Ours
60.7
65.3
68.2
38.5
61.9
80.3
w/o MoE
68.7
71.7
73.8
37.9
67.0
80.7
ODinW13
Ours
76.5
78.6
79.8
45.4
71.9
85.8
Table 5: Ablation study on the effectiveness of the MoE module. The best results for each baseline are highlighted in bold .
Method
Task
AP
AP50
AR75
APs
APm
APl
DE-VIT
OD
33.0
52.9
33.7
17.1
35.4
47.3
+ ours
OD
36.7
56.2
38.8
23.5
40.1
50.7
CD-VITO
CD-FSOD
29.6
49.1
30.0
5.7
24.4
37.6
+ ours
CD-FSOD
35.1
59.6
35.0
9.0
22.6
41.9
Table 6: Results of integrating our model into well-trained detectors. OD denotes the conventional object detection task evaluated on the COCO dataset and CDFSOD denotes the cross-domain few-shot object detection task evaluated on the CD-FSOD benchmark. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Figure 5: Effect of the Centerness-Guided Query Selection. Visualization of query selection before and after applying the Centerness-Guided Query Selection (CG-QS) module. Each pair of heatmaps (top: before, bottom: after) corresponds to the same image. After applying the CG-QS module, the model tends to select queries near object centers, thereby generating more accurate proposals.
Figure 6: Qualitative results of PF-RPN on several object detection benchmarks. PF-RPN exhibits strong cross-domain generalization and localization ability, accurately proposing potential object regions without any domain-specific fine-tuning.
Figure 7: Prediction box comparison. The red box corresponds to the query indicated by the red star, while the blue box corresponds to the query indicated by the blue star. It can be observed that the query located near the object center produces a more accurate bounding box than queries near object boundaries.
k
AR 100
AR 300
AR 900
AR s
AR m
AR l
1
60.3
64.7
67.4
44.2
60.0
78.8
2
60.7
65.3
68.2
38.5
61.9
80.3
3
59.9
64.4
67.3
41.5
59.0
79.6
4
59.7
64.4
67.3
41.5
59.0
79.6
Table 7: Ablation study of parameter k in the Sparse Image-Aware Adapter module on the CD-FSOD benchmark. Best results are highlighted in bold .
k
AR 100
AR 300
AR 900
AR s
AR m
AR l
1
60.5
65.1
68.1
39.6
59.8
79.4
3
60.6
65.1
68.1
39.6
60.3
79.5
5
60.7
65.3
68.2
38.5
61.9
80.3
7
58.5
63.1
66.3
37.1
58.3
79.2
9
59.6
64.3
67.4
39.7
59.6
78.9
Table 8: Ablation study of parameter λ in the Objective Loss on CD-FSOD benchmark. The best results are highlighted in bold .
Figure 8: Comparison of feature localization between object-internal features and the learnable embedding F~T . The similarity map in Fig. 8(a) shows that the 4th-level feature at the red point focuses on the object region with high semantic consistency, while the learnable embedding F~T in Fig. 8(b) produces a more diffused response, indicating weaker object correspondence.
Iteration
AR100
AR300
AR900
ARs
ARm
ARl
ms/img
Iter 1
59.6
63.1
65.4
35.7
57.8
77.7
214.3
Iter 2
59.9
63.7
65.9
36.7
57.9
78.2
216.7
Iter 3
60.7
65.3
68.2
38.5
61.9
80.3
218.9
Table 9: Latency and performance analysis of different CSP iterations on the CD-FSOD benchmark.
Metric
GLIP [ 26 ]
CasRPN [ 39 ]
RPN [ 34 ]
PF-RPN(GDINO)
PF-RPN(YWorld)
AR100
47.6
45.8
32.0
60.7
52.3
FPS
5.5
24.8
27.8
4.6
25.1
Table 10: Efficiency comparison of PF-RPN integrated with different detectors.
DeViT [ 49 ]
DeViT + Ours
CD-ViTO [ 12 ]
CD-ViTO + Ours
Metric
Top 100
Top 300
Top 100
Top 300
Top 100
Top 300
Top 100
Top 300
FP ( ↓ )
18.2
21.7
17.1
18.3
15.3
20.2
14.6
17.9
AP ( ↑ )
32.3
33.4
37.3 (+5.0)
37.1 (+3.7)
26.8
29.0
34.2 (+7.4)
35.1 (+6.1)
Table 11: Analysis of false positives on different baselines under varying top proposal settings.
Method
AR100
AR300
AR900
ARs
ARm
ARl
MMGDINO-B
72.4
73.5
73.9
46.4
66.7
78.7
+ Ours
76.3
78.9
79.8
45.7
75.2
86.3
MMGDINO-L
73.6
74.2
74.5
48.3
69.8
79.4
+ Ours
77.4
79.1
80.1
48.5
78.4
86.5
Table 12: Performance comparison of integrating PF-RPN with stronger base models (MMGrounding DINO [ 58 ] ).
Average Recall (AR)
Scale ( AR )
Efficiency
Benchmark
Method
AR100
AR300
AR900
S
M
L
FPS
VRAM
GDINO [ 26 ]
54.7
57.8
61.6
34.1
49.3
67.0
3.3
0.9G
GenerateU [ 22 ]
47.7
54.1
55.7
28.1
48.3
69.4
0.22
12.2G
Open-Det [ 3 ]
36.6
46.3
54.3
28.2
45.3
67.7
0.15
30.7G
CD-FSOD
PF-RPN (Ours)
60.7
65.3
68.2
38.5
61.9
80.3
4.6
0.5G
GDINO [ 26 ]
69.1
70.9
72.4
40.8
64.6
78.4
3.3
0.9G
Table 13: Comparison with open-source prompt-free methods regarding performance and efficiency.
Figure 9: Detailed performance ( AR ) trends on all 19 target datasets compared to alternative methods.
Visual prompted object detection enables interactive and flexible definition of target categories, thereby facilitating open-vocabulary detection. Since visual prompts are derived directly from image features, they often outperform text prompts in recognizing rare categories. Nevertheless, research on visual prompted detection has been largely overlooked, and it is typically treated as a byproduct of training text prompted detectors, which hinders its development. To fully unlock the potential of visual-prompted detection, we investigate the reasons why its performance is suboptimal and reveal that the underlying issue lies in the absence of global discriminability in visual prompts. Motivated by these observations, we propose DETR-ViP, a robust object detection framework that yields class-distinguishable visual prompts. On top of basic image-text contrastive learning, DETR-ViP incorporates global prompt integration and visual-textual prompt relation distillation to learn more discriminative prompt representations. In addition, DETR-ViP employs a selective fusion strategy that ensures stable and robust detection. Extensive experiments on COCO, LVIS, ODinW, and Roboflow100 demonstrate that DETR-ViP achieves substantially higher performance in visual prompt detection compared to other state-of-the-art counterparts. A series of ablation studies and analyses further validate the effectiveness of the proposed improvements and shed light on the underlying reasons for the enhanced detection capability of visual prompts.
Bo Qian, Dahu Shi, Xing Wei
School of Software Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University · State Key Laboratory of Human-Machine Hybrid Augmented Intelligence, Xi’an Jiaotong University · Work done during the internship at Hikrobot Co., Ltd. +2
Open-Set Object Detection (OSOD) enables recognition of novel categories beyond fixed classes but faces challenges in aligning text representations with complex visual concepts and the scarcity of image-text pairs for rare categories. This results in suboptimal performance in specialized domains or with complex objects. Recent visual-prompted methods partially address these issues but often involve complex multi-modal designs and multi-stage optimizations, prolonging the development cycle. Additionally, effective training strategies for data-driven OSOD models remain largely unexplored. To address these challenges, we propose PET-DINO, a universal detector supporting both text and visual prompts. Our Alignment-Friendly Visual Prompt Generation (AFVPG) module builds upon an advanced text-prompted detector, addressing the limitations of text representation guidance and reducing the development cycle. We introduce two prompt-enriched training strategies: Intra-Batch Parallel Prompting (IBP) at the iteration level and Dynamic Memory-Driven Prompting (DMD) at the overall training level. These strategies enable simultaneous modeling of multiple prompt routes, facilitating parallel alignment with diverse real-world usage scenarios. Comprehensive experiments demonstrate that PET-DINO exhibits competitive zero-shot object detection capabilities across various prompt-based detection protocols. These strengths can be attributed to inheritance-based philosophy and prompt-enriched training strategies, which play a critical role in building an effective generic object detector. Project page: https://fuweifuvtoo.github.io/pet-dino.
Weifu Fu, Jinyang Li, Bin-Bin Gao +6
YouTu Lab, Tencent · Huazhong University of Science and Technology · Kling Team, Kuaishou Technology
Referring Camouflaged Object Detection (Ref-COD) requires segmenting hidden targets guided by reference cues. While supervised methods are annotation-heavy and training-free approaches via sparse point-prompting are sensitive to localization errors, we propose GFR-SAM, a robust three-stage training-free framework. GFR-SAM shifts the paradigm from fragile point-matching to a "Generate-Filter-Refine" pipeline. First, we introduce In-Context Exemplar-guided Segmentation, empowering SAM3 with cross-image inference to generate candidate masks via holistic visual exemplars, bypassing its native intra-image constraints. Second, a Region-Global Contrastive Filtering module ranks candidates through DINOv3-based prototypical alignment, effectively suppressing background distractors. Finally, a Geometric-Semantic Refinement module synergizes bounding box and text prompts to recover fine-grained boundaries and enhance instance recall. Evaluated on the R2C7K benchmark, GFR-SAM outperforms existing training-free methods by 8.7% in weighted F-measure (Fβw) and competes with supervised state-of-the-art counterparts. Ultimately, this work underscores the potential of unlocking SAM3's latent capability for cross-image In-Context prompting, establishing a robust, training-free paradigm that effectively bridges the gap between general-purpose foundation models and specialized, label-intensive perception tasks without the need for task-specific fine-tuning.
Yilong Yang, Jianxin Tian, Shengchuan Zhang +1
Key Laboratory of Multimedia Trusted Perception and Efficient Computing, Ministry of Education of China, Xiamen University