Comparing compact codebooks for visual categorization

  • Authors:

  • Jan C. van Gemert;Cees G. M. Snoek;Cor J. Veenman;Arnold W. M. Smeulders;Jan-Mark Geusebroek

  • Affiliations:

  • Intelligent Systems Lab Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Intelligent Systems Lab Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Intelligent Systems Lab Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Intelligent Systems Lab Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Intelligent Systems Lab Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Kruislaan 403, 1098 SJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands

  • Venue:
  • Computer Vision and Image Understanding
  • Year:
  • 2010

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In the face of current large-scale video libraries, the practical applicability of content-based indexing algorithms is constrained by their efficiency. This paper strives for efficient large-scale video indexing by comparing various visual-based concept categorization techniques. In visual categorization, the popular codebook model has shown excellent categorization performance. The codebook model represents continuous visual features by discrete prototypes predefined in a vocabulary. The vocabulary size has a major impact on categorization efficiency, where a more compact vocabulary is more efficient. However, smaller vocabularies typically score lower on classification performance than larger vocabularies. This paper compares four approaches to achieve a compact codebook vocabulary while retaining categorization performance. For these four methods, we investigate the trade-off between codebook compactness and categorization performance. We evaluate the methods on more than 200h of challenging video data with as many as 101 semantic concepts. The results allow us to create a taxonomy of the four methods based on their efficiency and categorization performance.