顯示具有 L2 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 L2 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

[3/4] Efficient visual search of videos cast as text retrieval, J. Sivic, and A. Zisserman'09

0 意見
A. Summary (mostly come from from ABSTRACT)

We describe an approach to object retrieval which searches for and localizes all the occurrences of an object in a video, given a query image of the object.

The object is represented by a set of viewpoint invariant region descriptors so that recognition can proceed successfully despite changes in viewpoint, illumination and partial occlusion.

The temporal continuity of the video within a shot is used to track the regions in order to reject those that are unstable.

Efficient retrieval is achieved by employing methods from statistical text retrieval, including inverted file systems, and text and document frequency weightings.

This requires a visual analogy of a word which is provided here by vector quantizing the region descriptors.

The final ranking also depends on the spatial layout of the regions. The result is that retrieval is immediate, returning a ranked list of shots in the manner of Google [6].

We report results for object retrieval on the full length feature films ‘Groundhog Day’, ‘Casablanca’ and ‘Run Lola Run’, including searches from within the movie and specified by
external images downloaded from the Internet.

We investigate retrieval performance with respect to different quantizations of region descriptors and compare the performance of several ranking measures. Performance is also compared to a baseline method implementing standard frame to frame matching.

B. Conclusion (rewrite from CONCLUSION, plus some comments)

1. Object retrieval, based on vector-quantized viewpoint invariant descriptors.

2. Vector quantization does not appear to introduce a significant loss in retrieval performance (precision or recall) compared to nearest neighbour matching.

Currently, descriptors are assigned to the nearest cluster centre using linear search. Recently however, efficient search methods using
hierarchical tree structured vocabulary [24]
vocabulary indexed by randomized trees [28]
descriptor indexing by decision trees [14], [26] have been used.
Hierarchical vocabularies [11], [24] can also reduce descriptor quantization effects and can, to some extent, overcome the difficulty with choosing the number of cluster centres.

The spatial consistency re-ranking was shown to be very effective in improving the precision and removing false positive matches. However, the precision could be further improved by a more thorough (and more expensive) verification, based on a stricter measure of spatial similarity (e.g. angular ordering of regions [35], region overlap [10], deformable mesh matching [29], or common affine geometric transformation [18], [28]).

Unless the system is being designed solely to retrieve rigid objects, care must be taken not to remove true positive matches on deformable objects, such as people’s clothing, by using measures that apply only to rigid geometry. To reduce the computational cost, verification can be implemented as a sequence of progressively more thorough (and more expensive) filtering stages.

Spatially verified returns can be used to automatically expand the initial user-given query
with additional visual words leading to a significantly improved retrieval performance [8].

[3/4] Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints, Lawe'04

0 意見
A. Summary (mostly come from from ABSTRACT)

This paper presents a method for extracting distinctive invariant features from images that can be used to perform reliable matching between different views of an object or 'scene'.

major stages of computation used to generate the set of image features:
1. Scale-space extrema detection:
searches over all scales and image locations by using DoG
2. Keypoint localization
3. Orientation assignment (based on local image gradient directions)
4. Keypoint descriptor

The features are invariant to image scale and rotation, and are shown to provide robust matching across a a substantial range of affine distortion, change in 3D viewpoint, addition of noise, and change in illumination.

The features are highly distinctive, in the sense that a single feature can be correctly matched with high probability against a large database of features from many images.

This paper also describes an approach to using these features for object recognition.
The recognition proceeds by matching individual features to a database of features from known objects using a fast nearest-neighbor algorithm, followed by a Hough transform to identify clusters belonging to a single object, and finally performing verification through least-squares solution for consistent pose parameters.

This approach to recognition can robustly identify objects among clutter and occlusion while achieving near real-time performance.


B. Conclusion (rewrite from CONCLUSION, plus some comments)

1. Distinctiveness, so that enables the correct match for a keypoint to be selected from a large database of other keypoints.

2. Invariant to image rotation and scale.
Achieve scale-invariant by apply various Gaussian kernel, and rotation-invariant by dominant gradient.

3. Robust across a substantial range of affine distortion, addition of noise, and change in
illumination.

4. Large numbers of keypoints leads to robustness in extracting small objects among clutter.
Also, use bags of feature points comes with time issue when matching keypoints among large-scale database.

5. The research of Weber, Welling, and Perona (2000) and Fergus, Perona, and Zisserman (2003) has shown the potential of this approach by learning small sets of local features that are suited to recognizing generic classes of objects.

[3/4] Lecture 02: Local Features and Visual Words

0 意見
what is the most important characteristic of a feature
efficiency? yes
dimension length? (yes but usually long for image and video)
invariant? !! scale, rotation

*local feature began widely used about when '01

bag of feature points
problem: efficiency, thousands of them need to be matched

Local Feature = Detector + Descriptor (where are them, how to represent)

Detector:
point-based
region-based
scale invariant: LoG, DoG(for low quality), Harris-Laplace
affine invariant: Harris-Affine, Hessian-Affine, ..., etc

*DoG(Difference of Gaussian) detector:
apply various kernels and scales
deal with scale-invariant

Descriptor:
*SIFT: empirically 4x4(windows)x8(bins)=128 dimensions
deal with rotation-invariant


Visual Word
  quantized local descriptor (by clustering) e.g. SIFT
*some issues
  the more, the better?
    yes, but saturates in object retrieval, or even degrade in classification
  efficiency issue.
    Algorithm-wise or Parallelize
  sampling method
    sparse, dense, or random
  feature selection and reduction
    pLSA and LDA
  low recalls
    soft-assignment, query expansion