LDA Versus MMD Approximation on Mislabeled Images for Dependant Selection of Visual Features and Their Heterogeneity

We propose first to generate new visual features based on entropy measure (heterogeneity), and then we address the question of feature selection in the context of mislabeled images for automatic image classification. We compare two methods of word dependant feature selection on mislabeled images: approximation of linear discriminant analysis (ALDA) and approximation of maximum marginal diversity (AMMD). A hierarchical ascendant classification (HAC) is trained and tested using full or reduced visual space. Experiments are conducted on 10 K Corel images with 52 keywords, 40 visual features (U) and 40 new heterogeneity features (H). Compared to HAC on all U features, we measure a classification gain of 56% and in the same time a reduction of 92% of the number of features using a simple late fusion of U and H

[1]  James Ze Wang,et al.  SIMPLIcity: Semantics-Sensitive Integrated Matching for Picture LIbraries , 2001, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[2]  Jonathan Goldstein,et al.  When Is ''Nearest Neighbor'' Meaningful? , 1999, ICDT.

[3]  Nuno Vasconcelos Feature selection by maximum marginal diversity: optimality and implications for visual recognition , 2003, 2003 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2003. Proceedings..

[4]  Thomas D. Albright Why do things look as they do?: Contextual influences on visual processing , 2002 .

[5]  Peter H. N. de With,et al.  Multistage Face Recognition Using Adaptive Feature Selection and Classification , 2005, ACIVS.

[6]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[7]  Sabrina Tollari,et al.  Keyword dependant selection of visual features and their heterogeneity for image content-based interpretation , 2007 .

[8]  Hervé Glotin,et al.  Shape reasoning on mis-segmented and mis-labeled objects using approximated Fisher criterion , 2006, Comput. Graph..

[9]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  Normalized cuts and image segmentation , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[10]  Philippe Mulhem,et al.  A model for weighting image objects in home photographs , 2005, CIKM '05.

[11]  James Ze Wang,et al.  SIMPLIcity: Semantics-Sensitive Integrated Matching for Picture LIbraries , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[12]  Hervé Glotin,et al.  Approximation of Linear Discriminant Analysis for Word Dependent Visual Features Selection , 2005, ACIVS.

[13]  Jaime G. Carbonell,et al.  Machine learning research , 1981, SGAR.

[14]  Chalapathy Neti,et al.  Large Vocabulary Audio-Visual Speech Recognition , 2002 .

[15]  Patrick Gros,et al.  Robust Object Recognition in Images and the Related Database Problems , 2004, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[16]  Shigeo Abe DrEng Pattern Classification , 2001, Springer London.

[17]  David A. Forsyth,et al.  Matching Words and Pictures , 2003, J. Mach. Learn. Res..