MS COCO (Common Objects in Context) ranks higher at 61/100 vs Cades at 47/100. Capability-level comparison backed by match graph evidence from real search data.
| Feature | Cades | MS COCO (Common Objects in Context) |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Product | Dataset |
| UnfragileRank | 47/100 | 61/100 |
| Adoption | 0 | 1 |
| Quality |
| 1 |
| 1 |
| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 14 decomposed | 11 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Converts visual design mockups (screenshots, Figma exports, wireframes) into functional application code by analyzing layout, component hierarchy, and styling through computer vision, then generating corresponding HTML/CSS/JavaScript or framework-specific code. The system maps visual elements to semantic UI components and preserves design intent through CSS-in-JS or utility-class frameworks.
Unique: Integrates design analysis (via computer vision on mockups) with code generation in a single platform, eliminating the traditional design-to-development handoff; uses visual element detection to infer semantic component structure rather than treating designs as static images
vs alternatives: Faster than manual coding or traditional design-to-dev workflows because it skips the specification document phase and generates working code directly from visual input, though output quality is lower than hand-crafted code
Transforms natural language descriptions of app requirements (e.g., 'a todo list with user authentication and dark mode') into functional application scaffolding by parsing intent, inferring data models, generating CRUD operations, and wiring UI components to backend logic. Uses LLM-based code generation with prompt engineering to produce framework-specific boilerplate.
Unique: Combines natural language understanding with multi-layer code generation (UI, API, database) in a single workflow, inferring architectural decisions from text rather than requiring explicit specification; uses LLM-based intent parsing to map requirements to code patterns
vs alternatives: Faster than traditional development for MVPs because it generates full-stack scaffolding from text alone, but produces lower-quality code than hand-written solutions and requires significant manual refinement for production use
Automatically generates form components with built-in validation, error handling, and submission logic based on data models or requirements. Supports multiple input types (text, select, checkbox, date, etc.) and generates client-side and server-side validation rules. Includes accessibility features and error messaging.
Unique: Generates complete form implementations (not just HTML) with integrated validation, error handling, and API submission, using data model inference to create semantically correct forms; supports both client-side and server-side validation
vs alternatives: Faster than manual form coding because it generates complete implementations from data models, but less flexible than hand-written forms because it uses opinionated patterns
Allows developers to refine generated applications through natural language feedback and requests (e.g., 'make the button blue', 'add a search feature', 'change the layout to two columns'). The system parses feedback, identifies affected code sections, and applies changes while maintaining code consistency. Supports multi-turn refinement conversations.
Unique: Enables multi-turn conversational refinement of generated code through natural language, parsing feedback to identify affected code sections and applying changes while maintaining consistency; uses context from previous feedback to improve understanding
vs alternatives: More intuitive than manual code editing for non-technical users because it accepts natural language feedback, but less precise than direct code editing because it relies on interpretation
Integrates with Figma to automatically sync design tokens (colors, typography, spacing) and component definitions from design files into generated code. Updates generated applications when design system changes, maintaining consistency between design and implementation. Supports bi-directional sync for design-code alignment.
Unique: Automatically syncs design tokens and component definitions from Figma into generated code, maintaining design-code alignment without manual updates; uses Figma API to detect changes and apply updates to generated applications
vs alternatives: Reduces manual design-code sync work compared to manual token management, but requires proper Figma setup and naming conventions to work effectively
Analyzes generated code for performance bottlenecks and provides optimization suggestions (e.g., code splitting, lazy loading, image optimization, bundle size reduction). Includes automated optimizations for common patterns and generates optimized versions of code with explanations of improvements.
Unique: Analyzes generated code for performance issues and provides both suggestions and automated optimizations, using static code analysis to identify bottlenecks and generate optimized versions with explanations
vs alternatives: More accessible than manual performance optimization because it provides automated suggestions and optimizations, but less effective than profiling-driven optimization because it lacks runtime metrics
Provides an in-browser code editor with real-time AI-powered code completion, refactoring suggestions, and debugging hints. The editor integrates with the generated code, allowing developers to modify, extend, and optimize generated applications through natural language prompts or traditional editing, with live preview of changes.
Unique: Integrates AI-powered code assistance directly into the editor alongside live preview, allowing developers to iterate on generated code with real-time feedback and visual validation; uses context-aware LLM prompting to suggest improvements based on the full codebase
vs alternatives: More integrated than standalone AI coding assistants (like Copilot) because it combines editing, preview, and generation in one interface, reducing context-switching; less powerful than full IDEs because it lacks advanced debugging, profiling, and refactoring tools
Automatically extracts reusable UI components from generated code and organizes them into a project-specific component library. Components are catalogued with props, variants, and usage examples, allowing developers to reuse patterns across multiple pages or applications without duplicating code. Supports component composition and inheritance.
Unique: Automatically identifies and catalogs reusable components from generated code, creating a project-specific design system without manual component definition; uses AST analysis to infer component boundaries and props
vs alternatives: Faster than manually building component libraries because it extracts patterns from existing code, but less comprehensive than hand-curated design systems because it relies on heuristics
+6 more capabilities
Provides 2.5 million manually-annotated object instances across 330,000 images with dual segmentation encoding: polygon coordinates for precise boundary definition and RLE (run-length encoding) for efficient storage and computation. Each instance includes bounding box coordinates in [x, y, width, height] format, category label from 80 object classes, and instance-level unique identifiers enabling per-object tracking and evaluation. Annotations are structured in JSON format with hierarchical organization linking images to annotations to categories, supporting both dense object scenes and sparse single-object images.
Unique: Dual segmentation encoding (polygon + RLE) in single dataset enables both precise boundary analysis and efficient computational workflows; 2.5M instances across 330K images provides scale unmatched by contemporaneous datasets (ImageNet had ~1.2M images, PASCAL VOC had ~11K images)
vs alternatives: Larger and more densely annotated than PASCAL VOC (11K images, ~6 objects/image) and more task-diverse than ImageNet (classification-only); RLE encoding enables 10-100x faster mask loading than polygon-only formats
Provides keypoint annotations for all people in images using a standardized 17-joint skeleton model (head, shoulders, elbows, wrists, hips, knees, ankles) with (x, y, visibility) tuples per joint. Visibility flag indicates whether keypoint is annotated (1), occluded (0), or outside image bounds (0). Keypoints are linked to parent person instances via instance ID, enabling pose estimation evaluation at both individual and crowd-level scales. Annotations follow COCO Keypoints task specification with consistent coordinate system across all 330K images.
Unique: Standardized 17-joint skeleton with explicit visibility flags enables robust evaluation of pose estimation under occlusion; linked to instance segmentation masks allows joint-level accuracy analysis within person bounding boxes
MS COCO (Common Objects in Context) scores higher at 61/100 vs Cades at 47/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than OpenPose dataset (no visibility flags) and larger scale than Human3.6M (3.6M frames vs 330K images); visibility annotations enable explicit occlusion handling unlike MPII (which lacks visibility metadata)
COCO ecosystem includes community-created extensions (COCO-Stuff, COCO DensePose, COCO Panoptic) that extend base dataset with additional annotations while maintaining compatibility with COCO API and evaluation infrastructure. Extensions follow COCO format and evaluation standards, enabling seamless integration into existing pipelines. Community contributions are vetted and published as official COCO variants, ensuring quality and standardization. Variant creation process is documented, enabling researchers to create custom extensions.
Unique: Standardized extension process enables community contributions while maintaining compatibility; official variants (Stuff, DensePose, Panoptic) are vetted and published, ensuring quality and discoverability
vs alternatives: More extensible than fixed datasets; community variants enable specialized use cases without forking; standardized format prevents fragmentation unlike ad-hoc dataset variants
Provides 1.65 million image-caption pairs (5 captions × 330K images) with natural language descriptions written by human annotators. Each caption is a free-form English sentence describing objects, actions, and scene context without enforced length limits or structured templates. Captions are stored in JSON format linked to image IDs, enabling training of vision-language models for image captioning, visual question answering, and cross-modal retrieval. Multiple captions per image capture linguistic diversity and alternative descriptions of the same visual content.
Unique: 5 captions per image (vs 1 in most datasets) captures linguistic diversity and enables robust evaluation of caption generation variability; 1.65M caption-image pairs provide scale for training large vision-language models
vs alternatives: 5x more captions per image than Flickr30K (1 caption/image) enabling better linguistic diversity modeling; larger scale than Visual Genome (108K images) while maintaining natural language quality vs automated alt-text
Extends base 80 object categories with 91 additional 'stuff' categories (background materials, textures, regions like sky, grass, wall) enabling dense semantic segmentation of entire images. Stuff categories are annotated as pixel-level masks without instance boundaries — all sky pixels are labeled 'sky' regardless of continuity. COCO-Stuff combines instance segmentation (80 objects) with semantic segmentation (171 total categories including stuff), stored as single-channel PNG masks where pixel value encodes category ID. Enables panoptic segmentation evaluation combining instance and stuff predictions.
Unique: 171-category taxonomy combining 80 instance objects + 91 stuff categories enables panoptic segmentation in single dataset; pixel-level masks for stuff enable dense scene understanding without instance boundaries
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than ADE20K (150 categories) and larger scale than Cityscapes (5K images); unified instance+stuff annotation enables panoptic evaluation unlike separate semantic/instance datasets
Combines instance segmentation (80 object categories with boundaries) and semantic segmentation (171 stuff categories without boundaries) into single panoptic prediction task. Evaluation uses Panoptic Quality (PQ) metric decomposed into Segmentation Quality (SQ — IoU of matched predictions) and Recognition Quality (RQ — detection rate). Panoptic masks encode both category ID and instance ID, enabling evaluation of both 'what' (category) and 'which' (instance identity) predictions. Standardized evaluation protocol with server-side metric computation ensures consistent benchmarking across submissions.
Unique: Panoptic Quality metric with explicit SQ/RQ decomposition enables fine-grained analysis of segmentation vs recognition errors; unified instance+stuff evaluation in single task forces models to handle both prediction types efficiently
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than separate instance/semantic benchmarks; PQ metric better captures real-world scene understanding than independent metrics; standardized evaluation prevents metric gaming unlike custom evaluation scripts
Provides dense 2D-to-3D correspondence maps for human bodies, mapping each pixel in a person instance to a 3D human body model surface. Annotations include UV coordinates (parameterization of 3D body surface) and body part indices enabling pixel-level body surface understanding. DensePose enables training of models that predict where each image pixel corresponds to on a canonical 3D human body, useful for pose transfer, virtual try-on, and detailed human understanding. Available from 2020 dataset version onwards, extends keypoint annotations with dense surface coverage.
Unique: Dense 2D-to-3D surface correspondence enables pixel-level body understanding beyond skeleton keypoints; UV parameterization allows transfer of appearance and shape across different people and poses
vs alternatives: More detailed than keypoint-only annotations (17 joints vs millions of surface points); enables pose transfer unlike keypoint datasets; larger scale than DensePose-specific datasets
Provides standardized evaluation metrics for each task (Average Precision for detection, IoU for segmentation, OKS for keypoints, BLEU/METEOR/CIDEr for captions, PQ for panoptic) computed server-side on held-out test set. Leaderboard system accepts structured JSON result submissions in COCO format, validates format, computes metrics, and ranks submissions by primary metric. Evaluation infrastructure ensures consistent benchmarking across all submissions and prevents metric gaming through standardized computation. Metrics are task-specific: AP/AP50/AP75 for detection, mIoU for segmentation, OKS for keypoints, CIDEr for captions.
Unique: Server-side metric computation prevents metric gaming and ensures consistency; task-specific metrics (AP, OKS, CIDEr, PQ) are standardized across all submissions enabling fair comparison; public leaderboard provides transparency and reproducibility
vs alternatives: More rigorous than self-reported metrics (prevents cherry-picking); standardized evaluation prevents metric implementation variations unlike custom evaluation scripts; public leaderboard enables community comparison unlike proprietary benchmarks
+3 more capabilities