1 / 33

ALIP: Automatic Linguistic Indexing of Pictures

ALIP: Automatic Linguistic Indexing of Pictures. Jia Li The Pennsylvania State University. Can a computer do this?. “Building, sky, lake, landscape, Europe, tree”. Outline. Background Statistical image modeling approach The system architecture The image model Experiments

elsu
Download Presentation

ALIP: Automatic Linguistic Indexing of Pictures

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. ALIP: Automatic Linguistic Indexing of Pictures Jia Li The Pennsylvania State University

  2. Can a computer do this? • “Building, sky, lake, landscape, Europe, tree”

  3. Outline • Background • Statistical image modeling approach • The system architecture • The image model • Experiments • Conclusions and future work

  4. Image Database • The image database contains categorized images. • Each category is annotated with a few words. • Landscape, glacier • Africa, wildlife • Each category of images is referred to as a concept.

  5. A Category of Images Annotation: “man, male, people, cloth, face”

  6. ALIP: Automatic Linguistic Indexing for Pictures • Learn relations between annotation words and images using the training database. • Profile each category by a statistical image model: 2-D Multiresolution Hidden Markov Model (2-D MHMM). • Assess the similarity between an image and a category by its likelihood under the profiling model.

  7. Outline • Background • Statistical image modeling approach • The system architecture • The image model • Experiments • Conclusions and future work

  8. Training Process

  9. Automatic Annotation Process

  10. Training Training images used to train a concept with description “man, male, people, cloth, face”

  11. Outline • Background • Statistical image modeling approach • The system architecture • The image model • Experiments • Conclusions and future work

  12. 2D HMM Regard an image as a grid. A feature vector is computed for each node. • Each node exists in a hidden state. • The states are governed by a Markov mesh (a causal Markov random field). • Given the state, the feature vector is conditionally independent of other feature vectors and follows a normal distribution. • The states are introduced to efficiently model the spatial dependence among feature vectors. • The states are not observable, which makes estimation difficult.

  13. 2D HMM The underlying states are governed by a Markov mesh. (i’,j’)<(i,j) if i’<i; or i’=i & j’<j Context: the set of states for (i’, j’): (i’, j’)<(i, j)

  14. 2-D MHMM Filtering, e.g., by wavelet transform • Incorporate features at multiple resolutions. • Provide more flexibility for modeling statistical dependence. • Reduce computation by representing context information hierarchically.

  15. 2D MHMM • An image is a pyramid grid. • A Markovian dependence is assumed across resolutions. • Given the state of a parent node, the states of its child nodes follow a Markov mesh with transition probabilities depending on the parent state.

  16. 2D MHMM • First-order Markov dependence across resolutions.

  17. 2D MHMM • The child nodes at resolution r of node (k,l) at resolution r-1: • Conditional independence given the parent state:

  18. 2-D MHMM • Statistical dependence among the states of sibling blocks is characterized by a 2-D HMM. • The transition probability depends on: • The neighboring states in both directions • The state of the parent block

  19. 2-D MHMM (Summary) • 2-D MHMM finds “modes” of the feature vectors and characterizes their inter- and intra-scale spatial dependence.

  20. Estimation of 2-D HMM • Parameters to be estimated: • Transition probabilities • Mean and covariance matrix of each Gaussian distribution • EM algorithm is applied for ML estimation.

  21. EM Iteration

  22. EM Iteration

  23. Computation Issues An approximation to the classification EM approach

  24. Annotation Process • Rank the categories by the likelihoods of an image to be annotated under their profiling 2-D MHMMs. • Select annotation words from those used to describe the top ranked categories. • Statistical significance is computed for each candidate word. • Words that are unlikely to have appeared by chance are selected. • Favor the selection of rare words.

  25. Outline • Background • Statistical image modeling approach • The system architecture • The image model • Experiments • Conclusions and future work

  26. Initial Experiment • 600 concepts, each trained with 40 images • 15 minutes Pentium CPU time per concept, train only once • highly parallelizable algorithm

  27. Preliminary Results Computer Prediction: people, Europe, man-made, water Building, sky, lake, landscape, Europe, tree People, Europe, female Food, indoor, cuisine, dessert Snow, animal, wildlife, sky, cloth, ice, people

  28. More Results

  29. Results: using our own photographs • P: Photographer annotation • Underlined words: words predicted by computer • (Parenthesis): words not in the learned “dictionary” of the computer

  30. Systematic Evaluation 10 classes: Africa, beach, buildings, buses, dinosaurs, elephants, flowers, horses, mountains, food.

  31. 600-class Classification • Task: classify a given image to one of the 600 semantic classes • Gold standard: the photographer/publisher classification • This procedure provides lower-bounds of the accuracy measures because: • There can be overlapsof semantics among classes (e.g., “Europe” vs. “France” vs. “Paris”, or, “tigers I” vs. “tigers II”) • Training images in the same class may not be visually similar (e.g., the class of “sport events” include different sports and different shooting angles) • Result: with 11,200 test images, 15% of the time ALIP selected the exact class as the best choice • I.e., ALIP is about 90 times more intelligent than a system with random-drawing system

  32. More Information • http://www.stat.psu.edu/~jiali/index.demo.html • J. Li, J. Z. Wang, ``Automatic linguistic indexing of pictures by a statistical modeling approach,'' IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 25(9):1075-1088,2003.

  33. Conclusions • Automatic Linguistic Indexing of Pictures • Highly challenging • Much more to be explored • Statistical modeling has shown some success. • To be explored: • Training image database is not categorized. • Better modeling techniques. • Real-world applications.

More Related