Semantic Visual Localization

Robust visual localization under a wide range of viewing conditions is a fundamental problem in computer vision. Handling the difficult cases of this problem is not only very challenging but also of high practical relevance, e.g., in the context of life-long localization for augmented reality or autonomous robots. In this paper, we propose a novel approach based on a joint 3D geometric and semantic understanding of the world, enabling it to succeed under conditions where previous approaches failed. Our method leverages a novel generative model for descriptor learning, trained on semantic scene completion as an auxiliary task. The resulting 3D descriptors are robust to missing observations by encoding high-level 3D geometric and semantic information. Experiments on several challenging large-scale localization datasets demonstrate reliable localization under extreme viewpoint, illumination, and geometry changes

One-class classifiers based on entropic spanning graphs

One-class classifiers offer valuable tools to assess the presence of outliers in data. In this paper, we propose a design methodology for one-class classifiers based on entropic spanning graphs. Our approach takes into account the possibility to process also non-numeric data by means of an embedding procedure. The spanning graph is learned on the embedded input data and the outcoming partition of vertices defines the classifier. The final partition is derived by exploiting a criterion based on mutual information minimization. Here, we compute the mutual information by using a convenient formulation provided in terms of the $\alpha$-Jensen difference. Once training is completed, in order to associate a confidence level with the classifier decision, a graph-based fuzzy model is constructed. The fuzzification process is based only on topological information of the vertices of the entropic spanning graph. As such, the proposed one-class classifier is suitable also for data characterized by complex geometric structures. We provide experiments on well-known benchmarks containing both feature vectors and labeled graphs. In addition, we apply the method to the protein solubility recognition problem by considering several representations for the input samples. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness and versatility of the proposed method with respect to other state-of-the-art approaches.Comment: Extended and revised version of the paper "One-Class Classification Through Mutual Information Minimization" presented at the 2016 IEEE IJCNN, Vancouver, Canad

Rethinking Zero-shot Video Classification: End-to-end Training for Realistic Applications

Trained on large datasets, deep learning (DL) can accurately classify videos into hundreds of diverse classes. However, video data is expensive to annotate. Zero-shot learning (ZSL) proposes one solution to this problem. ZSL trains a model once, and generalizes to new tasks whose classes are not present in the training dataset. We propose the first end-to-end algorithm for ZSL in video classification. Our training procedure builds on insights from recent video classification literature and uses a trainable 3D CNN to learn the visual features. This is in contrast to previous video ZSL methods, which use pretrained feature extractors. We also extend the current benchmarking paradigm: Previous techniques aim to make the test task unknown at training time but fall short of this goal. We encourage domain shift across training and test data and disallow tailoring a ZSL model to a specific test dataset. We outperform the state-of-the-art by a wide margin. Our code, evaluation procedure and model weights are available at this http URL

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

A Survey on Metric Learning for Feature Vectors and Structured Data

The need for appropriate ways to measure the distance or similarity between data is ubiquitous in machine learning, pattern recognition and data mining, but handcrafting such good metrics for specific problems is generally difficult. This has led to the emergence of metric learning, which aims at automatically learning a metric from data and has attracted a lot of interest in machine learning and related fields for the past ten years. This survey paper proposes a systematic review of the metric learning literature, highlighting the pros and cons of each approach. We pay particular attention to Mahalanobis distance metric learning, a well-studied and successful framework, but additionally present a wide range of methods that have recently emerged as powerful alternatives, including nonlinear metric learning, similarity learning and local metric learning. Recent trends and extensions, such as semi-supervised metric learning, metric learning for histogram data and the derivation of generalization guarantees, are also covered. Finally, this survey addresses metric learning for structured data, in particular edit distance learning, and attempts to give an overview of the remaining challenges in metric learning for the years to come.Comment: Technical report, 59 pages. Changes in v2: fixed typos and improved presentation. Changes in v3: fixed typos. Changes in v4: fixed typos and new method