98 Views

Download Presentation
## Recognition System Capacity

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

**Recognition System Capacity**Joseph A. O’Sullivan Samuel C. Sachs Professor Electronic Systems and Signals Research Laboratory Department of Electrical and Systems EngineeringWashington University in St. Louis (314) 935-4173; http://essrl.wustl.edu/~jaojao@wustl.edu Michael D. DeVore, UVA Naveen Singla Brandon Westover Supported in part by the Office of Naval Research Adaptive Sensing MURI Review, 06/27/06**Recognition System Capacity**• Motivation: • ATR; Network Centric Warfare; Biometrics; Image Understanding • Active Computations • Achievable Rate Regions • Inner and outer bounds • Successive refinement**Why Theorems?**• ONR Perspective: Want Systems That Work • Implementable on projected system architecture • Good performance • Our Perspective: Theorems Provide • Provable performance: bounds and guidelines • Validation and critique of existing system designs • Motivation for recognition system design: system architectures; database design; optimal compression for recognition; communication for recognition; active computations • Growing Awareness of Importance of Information Theory**Perspective on Image Understanding**• “Finding tanks is so World War II.” Bob Hummel, DARPA program manager, ATR Theory Workshop, Dec. 2004 • What make of car? • What year? • Who is driving? • Where has it been? • Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) • Demand more information from imagery**Biometrics Must Be**• Universal • Permanent • Unique • Measurable Uniqueness How unique? Bits. Measurability How measurable? Bits. Encoding A. K. Jain, et al., “Introduction to Biometrics,” 1999 John Daugman, http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/jgd1000/**Recognition System Capacity**• Motivation: • ATR; Network Centric Warfare; Biometrics; Image Understanding • Active Computations • Achievable Rate Regions • Inner and outer bounds • Successive refinement**System**Performance Analysis Resource Allocation Network Resources databases, communications, etc. Performance Estimate Algorithm (ATR) Target Type Estimate Sensors Sensor Data Active Computations Concept • Compute a sequence of inferences and performance estimates (probabilities or reliabilities). • Monitor available resources (time, processors, bandwidth, database, …). • Feed back performance: select next computation; reallocate resources; demand more data.**System**Performance Analysis Resource Allocation Network Resources databases, communications, etc. Performance Estimate Algorithm (ATR) Target Type Estimate Sensors Sensor Data Active Computations Concept • Successively refined inferences • Time or resources to achieve performance goal. • Additional data required to achieve performance goal.**Total System Performance**Resource Consumption Approximations • ATR system performance entails more than just accuracy: • Time to classify a target • Electrical power dissipation • Sensor engagement, CPU cycles, bits communicated, and other “opportunity costs” • Need real-time estimates of total system performance • Enable informed tradeoff of ATR accuracy with throughput and network resource consumption • Dynamically adapt the system as requirements, capabilities, and operational scenarios evolve**Active Computation**• The need to actively manage computations is acute in complex, time-critical environments • Information has a time value • Some information now may be better than a lot of information later, after it is too late to take decisive action • Ideally, we’d like some information now and more later • Static ATR implementations perform the same computations for every image they receive • No tentative answers are available before processing is finished • Availability of more time will not improve the solution accuracy**Active Computation**• Dynamic ATR systems employ active computations to maximize the time-value (or resource-value) of information • Approach: Generate a sequence of increasingly accurate classifications • More resources are consumed at every stage • Continue until accuracy is good enough, resource cap is reached, or the result is no longer relevant • Control the computations to maximize the total information value**Active Computation**• Maximum-likelihood ATR solution is • Solve a sequence of simpler problems • The functions get closer to with each stage • Each problem is easy to solve given previous solutions • Let be the sequence of problems that are chosen up to stage k • Let be the error and be the resources used • The best strategy at stage K minimizes the total expected cost**Active Computation**• Seek heuristic strategies that do not require prior knowledge of K, but are nearly optimal for all K • For example, maximize the expected future increase in likelihood**Recognition System Capacity**• Motivation: • ATR; Network Centric Warfare; Biometrics; Image Understanding • Active Computations • Achievable Rate Regions • Inner and outer bounds • Successive refinement**Recognition System Capacity:More Motivation**• Number of bits for recognition • Number of patterns that can be distinguished • Number of bits to extract from data • Size of long term memory • Data and processing dependence • Start with simple i.i.d. model**Select**one p(y|x) g U1,U2,…,UMx f φ xh X1 X2 . . . XMc X1 X2 . . . XMc p(x) Select one p(h) Rc y memory encoder sensory encoder Rx Ry sensory representation V ˆ memory representation h Objective: Pr{g(V)=h}>1-ε, s.t. R=(Rc, Rx, Ry)**Pattern Recognition Codes**and Achievable Rates**Rc=I(X;Y)**H(Y) 0 0 I(Y;V) H(X) I(X;U) `Unlimited’ U,V capacity: U=X, Y=V Rc < I(X;Y) Random channel coding V=Y Rc=I(X;Y)-I(X;Y|U) On the border, U-X-Y-V , so R*=R**=R. U=X Rc=0 Rc=I(X;Y)-I(X;Y|V) Poor memory: U=0 Rc < I(0;V)=0 Poor senses: V=0 Rc<I(U;0)=0. Rc=0 Rx > I(X;U) Ry > I(Y;V) Rc < I(U;V)-I(U;V|X,Y)**p(x,y)**X (U,V) Y g f φ A Related Gap: thedistributed source coding problem • - Problem: Characterize the achievable (Rx,Ry,Dx,Dy) • Sergio Servetto claimed solution at ITW 2006 • Solution should transfer to our problem**Targeting Info Link**• Link Target data to TOC • (type, location, motion,…) Naval Impact/Payoff: The Sensor to Shooter Problem Terminal ATR Weapon Link Shooter Link Sensor Data Link • Strike plan • Target location • ATR parameters • Recce Imagery (SAR, IR, Visible) • Intelligent Bandwidth Compression • Wide Area Cueing (ATC) • ATR • Reference Library, Aimpoint • Select Target • Strike Planning • Weapon Selection Ground Recce/Intel Station Strike Planning System**Convex Hull Inner BoundWestover and O’Sullivan ISIT 2005**• The convex hull of this inner bound is achievable. • Consider theset of all distributions such that conditioned on a random variable Q, we have U – X – Y – V. Then the achievable region is • For every case examined, this convex hull is achieved by time sharing between a length 4 MC and the (0,0,0) point.**Successive Refinement, Two-Stage RecognitionGiven a sequence**of (Mx1, My1, Mc1, n) pattern recognition codes, design a sequence of (Mx2, My2, Mc2, n) PR codes with the first sequence as subcodes Mx1≤Mx2 My1 ≤ My2 Mc1 <Mc2 “Up and to the right” Refining Code: (f2,Φ2,g2)n Coarse Code: (f1,Φ1,g1)n The rate sextuplet (Rx1,Ry1,Rc1,Rx2,Ry2,Rc2) is achievable if there exist sequences of recognition codes (f1,Φ1,g1)n and (f2,Φ2,g2)n such that Comment: two different systems (different patterns)**Achievability: Inner Bound**• Theorem: Two-stage recognition is achievable if there exist • auxiliary random variables U1, V1, U2, and V2 satisfying • Markov conditions: U1 – X – Y – V1 and • (U1,U2) – X – Y – (V1,V2). • Rate Bounds: • Inner Bound: Proof Sketch. At the coarse stage: • Use the coding strategy for the single-stage pattern recognition system • At the refining stage: • Given memory and sensory indices from the coarse stage, generate “refining” codebooks according to the conditional distributions p(u2|u1(·)) and p(v2|v1(·)). • Encode memory and sensory data with pairs of indices corresponding to coarse and refining stage • Use typical-set decoding to identify pattern**Inner Bound: Successive Refinement**• Corollary: Successive refinement is achievable if there exist • auxiliary random variables U1, V1, U2, and V2 satisfying • Markov condition: U1 – U2 – X – Y – V2 – V1. • Rate bounds: Analogous to the Markov condition for successive refinement for rate-distortion. Equitz and Cover, “Successive refinement of information,” IEEE Trans. Info. Theory, Mar. 1991.**Converse: Outer Bound**Theorem: If the rate sextuplet (Rx1,Ry1,Rc1,Rx2,Ry2,Rc2)is achievable then there exist auxiliary random variables U1, V1, U2, andV2satisfying • Markov conditions: U1 – X – Y and X – Y – V1 and (U1,U2) – X – Y and X – Y – (V1,V2). • Rate Bounds: Corollary: Two length 4 Markov chains follow: U1 – U2 – X – Y and X – Y – V2 – V1**Extension: Hierarchical Recognition Based on Random Labels**• Extend results so that the codebook is the same for the two stages • Randomly label each Xn(k) with a label L(k), out of exp[n(Rc2-Rc1)] labels • For each label, use a (Mx1, My1, Mc1, n) pattern recognition code • Given Yn, run every decoder (for every label) list of exp[n(Rc2-Rc1)] possible patterns • Use refinement codebooks to determine label and therefore the pattern**p(x|w)**p(x|w) p(w) p(x|w) Extension: Hierarchical Recognition Based on Hierarchical Pattern Model • Assume that the patterns are generated by a hierarchical model W X (class identity) • Inner Bound: U1 – W – Y – V1 and U1 – U2 – X – Y – V2 – V1 • Use a (Mx1, My1, Mc1, n) pattern recognition code to obtain Wn(i)(class) • Use refinement codebooks to determine Xn(i,j) (identity)**Extensions**• Inner bounds for prototypical examples: Gaussian, binary. Convex hull is achievable by successive refinement. • Successive refinement “up and to the right”**Recognition System Design**Collaborators Washington University Joseph A. O’Sullivan Andrew Li Naveen Singla Po-Hsiang Lai Lee Montagnino Brandon Westover Robert Pless Ronald S. Indeck Natalia A. Schmid (UWVa) Michael D. DeVore (UVa) Alan Van Nevel • Developing robust ATR algorithms, deriving limits on recognition performance • Quantifying recognition performance as a function of system resource measures • Developing algorithms and implementations that adapt to dynamically varying resource constraints • Time, availability of processors, communication bandwidth, data storage, sensor image quality • Impact: increase efficiency and effectiveness of system implementations • Information latency problem • Recognition systems using visual imagery, SAR, ladar • Increase in ATR performance • Allow more imagery to be screened • Provide systematic tools for analyzing design choices such as processors and network communication**Selected Limitations of Existing Systems**• “Stovepipe” design • Fixed inputs, processing, database, output • Fixed time • Algorithms are not transparent Seek “any-time” adaptive system design**Naval Capability Provided**“ Network centric warfare is military operations that exploit information and networking technology to integrate widely dispersed human decision makers, situational and targeting sensors, and forces and weapons into a highly adaptive, comprehensive system to achieve unprecedented mission effectiveness.” Network-Centric Naval Forces, Naval Studies Board, National Research Council, 2000 • Active Computations • Exploit technology • Integrate sensors, resource allocation,decision makers, algorithms • Adapt to dynamically varying resources • Provide measures of uncertainty as aa function of available resources