Home › Datasets › task › Weakly-Supervised Object Localization

Weakly-Supervised Object Localization datasets

archive 2025-07-28

3 datasets carry the task tag "Weakly-Supervised Object Localization" (the task itself: Weakly-Supervised Object Localization), ordered by the archive's paper count. Page 1 of 1: 3 shown of 3. Facet routes are this site's own (the archive records the tag string, not a page).

The archive holds 12,214 dataset rows; 12,172 are listed. 6 are withheld from every listing and count here as vandalised before snapshot (6 with contact-centre spam in the title, 0 with a spam description on a row that has no homepage, no paper and no papers counted; none with more than 1 paper, 0 with a benchmark), listed in withheld.json; 1 listed row carries a vandalised description, withheld on its page. This gate never withholds a row with a homepage or a paper that resolves, and a clean description; the content rules below withhold a row whose name is spam whatever else it carries. The gate is a phrase list: these are the rows it caught, not a claim that the rest is clean. Before that gate, the site's content rules withhold 36 more rows (invite-code, gambling, travel-booking, contact-centre and similar spam in the name or on a row with nothing real behind it); they have no page and are listed in withheld.json.

Filter 51 task tags shown of 3,717, by dataset count; the full filter by modality, task and language is on /datasets

Weakly-Supervised Object Localization datasets 1–3 of 3

The ImageNet dataset contains 14,197,122 annotated images according to the WordNet hierarchy.
15,430 papers · 52 benchmarks
CUB-200-2011 (Caltech-UCSD Birds-200-2011)
The Caltech-UCSD Birds-200-2011 (CUB-200-2011) dataset is the most widely-used dataset for fine-grained visual categorization task.
2,235 papers · 47 benchmarks
Tiny ImageNet contains 100000 images of 200 classes (500 for each class) downsized to 64×64 colored images.
1,232 papers · 7 benchmarks

Paper counts and descriptions are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28; no citation counts, no stars, no trending. Sorting by "most cited" or "newest" was a live-site feature the archive does not carry.