Multidimensional scaling of video surrogates

This article is concerned with the problem of representing moving images for information retrieval. Of primary concern is evaluating the representativeness of different types of surrogates for various tasks. The basic factor considered is the ability of a surrogate to enable users to make the same distinctions that they would make given the actual video. To explore this issue, four types of video surrogates were created and compared under two tasks. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) was used to map the dimensional dispersions of users' judgments of similarity between videos and similarity between surrogates. Congruence between these maps was used to evaluate the representativeness of each type of surrogate. Congruence was greater for image-based surrogates than for text-based surrogates overall, while congruence between text-based surrogates and videos was greatest when a specific task was introduced.

[1]  Sara Shatford Layne.  Some issues in the indexing of images , 1994 .

[2]  Samantha Kelly Hastings,et al.  Query Categories in a Study of Intellectual Access to Digitized Art Images. , 1995 .

[3]  S. Batley.  Visual information retrieval : browsing strategies in pictorial databases , 1988 .

[4]  Sara Shatford.  Describing a Picture: A Thousand Words are Seldom Cost Effective , 1984 .

[5]  Amarnath Gupta,et al.  Visual information retrieval , 1997, CACM.

[6]  M. Rorvig.  Psychometric measurement and information retrieval , 1988 .

[7]  J. Kruskal.  Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis , 1964 .

[8]  Raya Fidel,et al.  The image retrieval task: implications for the design and evaluation of image databases , 1997, New Rev. Hypermedia Multim..

[9]  James M. Turner.  Comparing User-Assigned Terms with Indexer-Assigned Terms for Storage and Retrieval of Moving Images: Research Results. , 1995 .

[10]  Sara Shatford,et al.  Analyzing the Subject of a Picture: A Theoretical Approach , 1986 .

[11]  M. Fischler,et al.  Intelligence: The Eye, the Brain, and the Computer , 1987 .

[12]  David C. Blair,et al.  Indeterminacy in the subject access to documents , 1986, Inf. Process. Manag..

[13]  Forrest W. Young.  Multidimensional Scaling: History, Theory, and Applications , 1987 .

[14]  R. Shepard.  The analysis of proximities: Multidimensional scaling with an unknown distance function. II , 1962 .

[15]  Mark E. Rorvig.  A method for automatically abstracting visual documents , 1993 .

[16]  Brian C. O'Connor,et al.  Access to Moving Image Documents: Background Concepts and Proposals for Surrogates for film and video Works , 1985, J. Documentation.

[17]  Peter G. B. Enser,et al.  Progress in Documentation Pictorial Information Retrieval , 1995, J. Documentation.

[18]  M. E. Maron,et al.  On indexing, retrieval and the meaning of about , 1977, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[19]  Gary Marchionini,et al.  Information Seeking in Electronic Environments , 1995 .

[20]  T G Bever,et al.  Segmentation in cinema perception. , 1976, Science.

[21]  K. Markey.  Interindexer consistency tests: a literature review and report of a test of consistency in indexing visual materials , 1984 .

[22]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Basic objects in natural categories , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.