I have a question about the difference between general object detectors and specific object detectors.
By specific object detectors, I'm referring to classifiers/object recognizers that are built to recognize a single object, eg. a person, or a vehicle.
By general object detectors, I am referring to algorithms which are trained on a number of different objects (and are therefore able to differentiate between a car, house, person, and banana). Importantly, I am referring here to algorithms that are inherently designed to accommodate many object classes, not merely collections of several specific object detectors put together.
I have an assumption, which is that: Specific object detectors, which are used to recognize a specific object such as a vehicle, are generally more accurate/precise, than the results to be expected from a general object detector which is being used to recognize that same vehicle, given the same amount of space and time.. The reason is that given limitations on space and time, there is only so much that an algorithm can capture. So using a specific object detector for vehicles would be more accurate since the time and space used by the algorithm's training and testing is specialized on vehicles only and is better at this task.... rather than using a general object detector for recognizing those same vehicles.
"With an increase in the number of objects to recognize, the complexity of models increases, and in accommodating for that, the reduction in accuracy of detection for each individual object also increases."
I've looked for evidence of this assumption but haven't found any yet. And is this assumption true? Is there any evidence to back up whether or not it's true?