Modeling of evolving textures using granulometries

This chapter describes a statistical approach to classification of dynamic texture images, called parallel evolution functions (PEFs). Traditional classification methods predict texture class membership using comparisons with a finite set of predefined texture classes and identify the closest class. However, where texture images arise from a dynamic texture evolving over time, estimation of a time state in a continuous evolutionary process is required instead. The PEF approach does this using regression modeling techniques to predict time state. It is a flexible approach which may be based on any suitable image features. Many textures are well suited to a morphological analysis and the PEF approach uses image texture features derived from a granulometric analysis of the image. The method is illustrated using both simulated images of Boolean processes and real images of corrosion. The PEF approach has particular advantages for training sets containing limited numbers of observations, which is the case in many real world industrial inspection scenarios and for which other methods can fail or perform badly. [41] G.W. Horgan, Mathematical morphology for analysing soil structure from images, European Journal of Soil Science, vol. 49, pp. 161–173, 1998. [42] G.W. Horgan, C.A. Reid and C.A. Glasbey, Biological image processing and enhancement, Image Processing and Analysis, A Practical Approach, R. Baldock and J. Graham, eds., Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 37–67, 2000. [43] B.B. Hubbard, The World According to Wavelets: The Story of a Mathematical Technique in the Making, A.K. Peters Ltd., Wellesley, MA, 1995. [44] H. Iversen and T. Lonnestad. An evaluation of stochastic models for analysis and synthesis of gray-scale texture, Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 15, pp. 575–585, 1994. [45] A.K. Jain and F. Farrokhnia, Unsupervised texture segmentation using Gabor filters, Pattern Recognition, vol. 24(12), pp. 1167–1186, 1991. [46] T. Jossang and F. Feder, The fractal characterization of rough surfaces, Physica Scripta, vol. T44, pp. 9–14, 1992. [47] A.K. Katsaggelos and T. Chun-Jen, Iterative image restoration, Handbook of Image and Video Processing, A. Bovik, ed., Academic Press, London, pp. 208–209, 2000. [48] M. K¨oppen, C.H. Nowack and G. R¨osel, Pareto-morphology for color image processing, Proceedings of SCIA99, 11th Scandinavian Conference on Image Analysis 1, Kangerlussuaq, Greenland, pp. 195–202, 1999. [49] S. Krishnamachari and R. Chellappa, Multiresolution Gauss-Markov random field models for texture segmentation, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 6(2), pp. 251–267, 1997. [50] T. Kurita and N. Otsu, Texture classification by higher order local autocorrelation features, Proceedings of ACCV93, Asian Conference on Computer Vision, Osaka, pp. 175–178, 1993. [51] S.T. Kyvelidis, L. Lykouropoulos and N. Kouloumbi, Digital system for detecting, classifying, and fast retrieving corrosion generated defects, Journal of Coatings Technology, vol. 73(915), pp. 67–73, 2001. [52] Y. Liu, T. Zhao and J. Zhang, Learning multispectral texture features for cervical cancer detection, Proceedings of 2002 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: Macro to Nano, pp. 169–172, 2002. [53] G. McGunnigle and M.J. Chantler, Modeling deposition of surface texture, Electronics Letters, vol. 37(12), pp. 749–750, 2001. [54] J. McKenzie, S. Marshall, A.J. Gray and E.R. Dougherty, Morphological texture analysis using the texture evolution function, International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 17(2), pp. 167–185, 2003. [55] J. McKenzie, Classification of dynamically evolving textures using evolution functions, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Strathclyde, UK, 2004. [56] S.G. Mallat, Multiresolution approximations and wavelet orthonormal bases of L2(R), Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 315, pp. 69–87, 1989. [57] S.G. Mallat, A theory for multiresolution signal decomposition: the wavelet representation, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 11, pp. 674–693, 1989. [58] B.S. Manjunath and W.Y. Ma, Texture features for browsing and retrieval of image data, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 18, pp. 837–842, 1996. [59] B.S. Manjunath, G.M. Haley and W.Y. Ma, Multiband techniques for texture classification and segmentation, Handbook of Image and Video Processing, A. Bovik, ed., Academic Press, London, pp. 367–381, 2000. [60] G. Matheron, Random Sets and Integral Geometry, Wiley Series in Probability and Mathematical Statistics, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1975

Learning to Evaluate Chess Positions with Deep Neural Networks and Limited Lookahead

In this paper we propose a novel supervised learning approach for training Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) to evaluate chess positions. The method that we present aims to train different ANN architectures to understand chess positions similarly to how highly rated human players do. We investigate the capabilities that ANNs have when it comes to pattern recognition, an ability that distinguishes chess grandmasters from more amateur players. We collect around 3,000,000 different chess positions played by highly skilled chess players and label them with the evaluation function of Stockfish, one of the strongest existing chess engines. We create 4 different datasets from scratch that are used for different classification and regression experiments. The results show how relatively simple Multilayer Perceptrons (MLPs) outperform Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) in all the experiments that we have performed. We also investigate two different board representations, the first one representing if a piece is present on the board or not, and the second one in which we assign a numerical value to the piece according to its strength. Our results show how the latter input representation influences the performances of the ANNs negatively in almost all experiments

Learning to Evaluate Chess Positions with Deep Neural Networks and Limited Lookahead

In this paper we propose a novel supervised learning approach for training Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) to evaluate chess positions. The method that we present aims to train different ANN architectures to understand chess positions similarly to how highly rated human players do. We investigate the capabilities that ANNs have when it comes to pattern recognition, an ability that distinguishes chess grandmasters from more amateur players. We collect around 3,000,000 different chess positions played by highly skilled chess players and label them with the evaluation function of Stockfish, one of the strongest existing chess engines. We create 4 different datasets from scratch that are used for different classification and regression experiments. The results show how relatively simple Multilayer Perceptrons (MLPs) outperform Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) in all the experiments that we have performed. We also investigate two different board representations, the first one representing if a piece is present on the board or not, and the second one in which we assign a numerical value to the piece according to its strength. Our results show how the latter input representation influences the performances of the ANNs negatively in almost all experiments

Fine-Grained Object Recognition and Zero-Shot Learning in Remote Sensing Imagery

Fine-grained object recognition that aims to identify the type of an object among a large number of subcategories is an emerging application with the increasing resolution that exposes new details in image data. Traditional fully supervised algorithms fail to handle this problem where there is low between-class variance and high within-class variance for the classes of interest with small sample sizes. We study an even more extreme scenario named zero-shot learning (ZSL) in which no training example exists for some of the classes. ZSL aims to build a recognition model for new unseen categories by relating them to seen classes that were previously learned. We establish this relation by learning a compatibility function between image features extracted via a convolutional neural network and auxiliary information that describes the semantics of the classes of interest by using training samples from the seen classes. Then, we show how knowledge transfer can be performed for the unseen classes by maximizing this function during inference. We introduce a new data set that contains 40 different types of street trees in 1-ft spatial resolution aerial data, and evaluate the performance of this model with manually annotated attributes, a natural language model, and a scientific taxonomy as auxiliary information. The experiments show that the proposed model achieves 14.3% recognition accuracy for the classes with no training examples, which is significantly better than a random guess accuracy of 6.3% for 16 test classes, and three other ZSL algorithms.Comment: G. Sumbul, R. G. Cinbis, S. Aksoy, "Fine-Grained Object Recognition and Zero-Shot Learning in Remote Sensing Imagery", IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing (TGRS), in press, 201

Supervised Classification: Quite a Brief Overview

The original problem of supervised classification considers the task of automatically assigning objects to their respective classes on the basis of numerical measurements derived from these objects. Classifiers are the tools that implement the actual functional mapping from these measurements---also called features or inputs---to the so-called class label---or output. The fields of pattern recognition and machine learning study ways of constructing such classifiers. The main idea behind supervised methods is that of learning from examples: given a number of example input-output relations, to what extent can the general mapping be learned that takes any new and unseen feature vector to its correct class? This chapter provides a basic introduction to the underlying ideas of how to come to a supervised classification problem. In addition, it provides an overview of some specific classification techniques, delves into the issues of object representation and classifier evaluation, and (very) briefly covers some variations on the basic supervised classification task that may also be of interest to the practitioner