Generative Image Modeling Using Spatial LSTMs

Modeling the distribution of natural images is challenging, partly because of strong statistical dependencies which can extend over hundreds of pixels. Recurrent neural networks have been successful in capturing long-range dependencies in a number of problems but only recently have found their way into generative image models. We here introduce a recurrent image model based on multi-dimensional long short-term memory units which are particularly suited for image modeling due to their spatial structure. Our model scales to images of arbitrary size and its likelihood is computationally tractable. We find that it outperforms the state of the art in quantitative comparisons on several image datasets and produces promising results when used for texture synthesis and inpainting

A survey of exemplar-based texture synthesis

Exemplar-based texture synthesis is the process of generating, from an input sample, new texture images of arbitrary size and which are perceptually equivalent to the sample. The two main approaches are statistics-based methods and patch re-arrangement methods. In the first class, a texture is characterized by a statistical signature; then, a random sampling conditioned to this signature produces genuinely different texture images. The second class boils down to a clever "copy-paste" procedure, which stitches together large regions of the sample. Hybrid methods try to combine ideas from both approaches to avoid their hurdles. The recent approaches using convolutional neural networks fit to this classification, some being statistical and others performing patch re-arrangement in the feature space. They produce impressive synthesis on various kinds of textures. Nevertheless, we found that most real textures are organized at multiple scales, with global structures revealed at coarse scales and highly varying details at finer ones. Thus, when confronted with large natural images of textures the results of state-of-the-art methods degrade rapidly, and the problem of modeling them remains wide open.Comment: v2: Added comments and typos fixes. New section added to describe FRAME. New method presented: CNNMR

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

Biologically Inspired Dynamic Textures for Probing Motion Perception

Perception is often described as a predictive process based on an optimal inference with respect to a generative model. We study here the principled construction of a generative model specifically crafted to probe motion perception. In that context, we first provide an axiomatic, biologically-driven derivation of the model. This model synthesizes random dynamic textures which are defined by stationary Gaussian distributions obtained by the random aggregation of warped patterns. Importantly, we show that this model can equivalently be described as a stochastic partial differential equation. Using this characterization of motion in images, it allows us to recast motion-energy models into a principled Bayesian inference framework. Finally, we apply these textures in order to psychophysically probe speed perception in humans. In this framework, while the likelihood is derived from the generative model, the prior is estimated from the observed results and accounts for the perceptual bias in a principled fashion.Comment: Twenty-ninth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), Dec 2015, Montreal, Canad