MIRACLE (FI) at ImageCLEFphoto 2009

The Miracle-FI participation at ImageCLEF 2009 photo retrieval task main goal was to improve the merge of content-based and text-based techniques in our experiments. The global system includes our own implemented tool IDRA (InDexing and Retrieving Automatically), and the Valencia University CBIR system. Analyzing both “topics_part1.txt” and “topics_part2.txt” task topics files, we have built different queries files, eliminating the negative sentences with the text from title and clusterTitle or clusterDescription, one query for each cluster (or not) of each topic from 1 to 25 and one for each of the three images of each topic from 26 to 50. In the CBIR system the number of low-level features has been increased from the 68 component used at ImageCLEF 2008 up to 114 components, and in this edition only the Mahalanobis distance has been used in our experiments. Three different merging algorithms were developed in order to fuse together different results lists from visual or textual modules, different textual indexations, or cluster level results into a unique topic level results list. For the five runs submitted we observe that MirFI1, MirFI2 and MifFI3 obtain quite higher precision values than the average ones. Experiment MirFI1, our best run for precision metrics (very similar to MirFI2 and MirFI3), appears in the 16th position in R-Precision classification and in the 19th in MAP one (from a total of 84 submitted experiments). MirFI4 and MirFI5 obtain our best diversity values, appearing in position 11th (over 84) in cluster recall classification, and being the 5th best group from all the 19 participating ones.

[1]  James R. Curran,et al.  Wide-Coverage Efficient Statistical Parsing with CCG and Log-Linear Models , 2007, Computational Linguistics.

[2]  Guillermo Ayala,et al.  A novel Bayesian framework for relevance feedback in image content-based retrieval systems , 2006, Pattern Recognit..

[3]  Guillermo Ayala,et al.  Spatial Size Distributions: Applications to Shape and Texture Analysis , 2001, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[4]  E. Dougherty,et al.  Gray-scale morphological granulometric texture classification , 1994 .

[5]  Mohan M. Trivedi,et al.  Segmentation of a high-resolution urban scene using texture operators , 1984, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[6]  Christopher D. Manning,et al.  Joint Parsing and Named Entity Recognition , 2009, NAACL.

[7]  Paul Clough,et al.  The IAPR TC-12 Benchmark: A New Evaluation Resource for Visual Information Systems , 2006 .

[8]  Mark Sanderson,et al.  Diversity in Photo Retrieval: Overview of the ImageCLEFPhoto Task 2009 , 2009, CLEF.

[9]  Hinrich Schütze,et al.  Introduction to information retrieval , 2008 .

[10]  D. Sagi,et al.  Gabor filters as texture discriminator , 1989, Biological Cybernetics.

[11]  Esther de Ves,et al.  Applying logistic regression to relevance feedback in image retrieval systems , 2007, Pattern Recognit..

[12]  Ana M. García Serrano,et al.  La herramienta IDRA (Indexing and Retrieving Automatically) , 2009 .

[13]  Rama Chellappa,et al.  Classification of textures using Gaussian Markov random fields , 1985, IEEE Trans. Acoust. Speech Signal Process..

[14]  Ian Burns,et al.  Measuring texture classification algorithms , 1997, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[15]  Ana M. García-Serrano,et al.  MIRACLE-FI at ImageCLEFphoto 2008: Experiences in merging Text-based and Content-based Retrievals , 2008, CLEF.