IMAGECLEF 2004-2005: RESULTS, EXPERIENCES AND NEW IDEAS FOR IMAGE RETRIEVAL EVALUATION

The ImageCLEF image retrieval benchmark was established in 2003 as part of the CLEF (Cross Language Evaluation Forum) to evaluate the retrieval of images from multilingual document collections or retrieval where a query is formulated in a language different from the language of the collection. In 2004, a visual retrieval task was added from the medical domain (using a mixed French/English annotation collection) because the use of visual information has one big advantage: it is inherently language independent. This article describes the achievements of ImageCLEF 2004 by describing its tasks, goals, and the submissions received. The key findings will be explained, which will lead to further ideas to improve retrieval system performance. These will also lead to new ideas for ImageCLEF 2005 that will also be described in this paper, together with the evaluation goals and challenges for ImageCLEF 2005. Systematic performance evaluation is extremely important to show the progress of research in a domain, and there is an important lack of standardised evaluation in image retrieval. ImageCLEF is trying to fill this gap by supplying document collections, image retrieval tasks and topics based on user needs and ground truth for evaluating systems. This creates resources that can subsequently be used to advance research in image retrieval. ImageCLEF also provides a forum in which mixed‐media information retrieval researchers can exchange ideas and technical details through an annual workshop to stimulate discussions and further research. Goal of this article is to motivate research groups from the multimedia retrieval area to participate at ImageCLEF and help propose interesting tasks for further evaluation cam

[1]  O. Ratib,et al.  Casimage Project: A Digital Teaching Files Authoring Environment , 2004, Journal of thoracic imaging.

[2]  Thierry Pun,et al.  Content-based query of image databases: inspirations from text retrieval , 2000, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[3]  Mohan S. Kankanhalli,et al.  Benchmarking Multimedia Databases , 1997, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[4]  David A. Forsyth,et al.  Benchmarks for storage and retrieval in multimedia databases , 2001, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[5]  Jacques Savoy Report on CLEF-2001 Experiments , 2001, CLEF.

[6]  King-Sun Fu,et al.  Query-by-Pictorial-Example , 1980, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[7]  Marcel Worring,et al.  Content-Based Image Retrieval at the End of the Early Years , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[8]  Mark Sanderson,et al.  The CLEF 2004 Cross-Language Image Retrieval Track , 2004, CLEF.

[9]  Joshua R. Smith,et al.  Image retrieval evaluation , 1998, Proceedings. IEEE Workshop on Content-Based Access of Image and Video Libraries (Cat. No.98EX173).

[10]  Stefan M. Rüger,et al.  Visual Features for Content-based Medical Image Retrieval , 2004, CLEF.

[11]  Stéphane Marchand-Maillet,et al.  Benchmarking Image Retrieval Applications , 2004 .

[12]  Neil J. Gunther,et al.  Benchmark for image retrieval using distributed systems over the Iinternet: BIRDS-I , 2000, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[13]  Dragutin Petkovic,et al.  Query by Image and Video Content: The QBIC System , 1995, Computer.

[14]  J. Wallis,et al.  An Internet-based nuclear medicine teaching file. , 1995, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[15]  W R Hersh,et al.  How well do physicians use electronic information retrieval systems? A framework for investigation and systematic review. , 1998, JAMA.

[16]  Clement H. C. Leung,et al.  Benchmarking for Content-Based Visual Information Search , 2000, VISUAL.

[17]  Michael Kohnen,et al.  The IRMA code for unique classification of medical images , 2003, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[18]  Mark Sanderson,et al.  The CLEF 2003 Cross Language Image Retrieval Task , 2003, CLEF.

[19]  Paul Over,et al.  TRECVID: evaluating the effectiveness of information retrieval tasks on digital video , 2004, MULTIMEDIA '04.

[20]  Cyril W. Cleverdon,et al.  Aslib Cranfield research project: report on the testing and analysis of an investigation into the comparative efficiency of indexing systems , 1962 .

[21]  K. Glatz-Krieger,et al.  Webbasierte Lernwerkzeuge für die Pathologie , 2003, Der Pathologe.

[22]  S. Uijtdehaage,et al.  Introducing HEAL: The Health Education Assets Library , 2003, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[23]  Stéphane Marchand-Maillet,et al.  Content-Based Video Retrieval: an Overview , 2000 .

[24]  Thierry Pun,et al.  Performance evaluation in content-based image retrieval: overview and proposals , 2001, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[25]  Beth Logan,et al.  A music similarity function based on signal analysis , 2001, IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, 2001. ICME 2001..

[26]  C. J. van Rijsbergen,et al.  Report on the need for and provision of an 'ideal' information retrieval test collection , 1975 .

[27]  Paul Over,et al.  TRECVID 2003 - an overview , 2003 .

[28]  Ian H. Jermyn,et al.  The Methodology and Practice of the Evaluation of Image Retrieval Systems and Segmentation Methods , 2003 .

[29]  Thierry Pun,et al.  The Truth about Corel - Evaluation in Image Retrieval , 2002, CIVR.

[30]  Donna K. Harman,et al.  Overview of the First Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-1) , 1992, TREC.

[31]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  Blobworld: A System for Region-Based Image Indexing and Retrieval , 1999, VISUAL.