SIMPLIcity: Semantics-Sensitive Integrated Matching for Picture LIbraries
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
A Metric for Distributions with Applications to Image Databases
ICCV '98 Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Computer Vision
Video Google: A Text Retrieval Approach to Object Matching in Videos
ICCV '03 Proceedings of the Ninth IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision - Volume 2
Scale & Affine Invariant Interest Point Detectors
International Journal of Computer Vision
Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints
International Journal of Computer Vision
International Journal of Computer Vision
Experiments on Selection of Codebooks for Local Image Feature Histograms
VISUAL '08 Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Visual Information Systems: Web-Based Visual Information Search and Management
Spatial extensions to bag of visual words
Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Image and Video Retrieval
Improving the accuracy of global feature fusion based image categorisation
SAMT'07 Proceedings of the semantic and digital media technologies 2nd international conference on Semantic Multimedia
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Histograms of local features--bags of visual words (BoV)-- have proven to be powerful representations in image categorisation and object detection. The BoV representations have usefully been extended in spatial dimension by taking the features' spatial distribution into account. In this paper we describe region matching strategies to be used in conjunction with such extensions. Of these, the rigid region matching is most commonly used. Here we present an alternative based on the Integrated Region Matching (IRM) technique, loosening the constraint of geometrical rigidity of the images. After having described the techniques, we evaluate them in image category detection experiments that utilise 5000 photographic images taken from the PASCAL VOC Challenge 2007 benchmark. Experiments show that for many image categories, the rigid region matching performs slightly better. However, for some categories IRM matching is significantly more accurate an alternative. As a consequence, on average we did not observe a significant difference. The best results were obtained by combining the two schemes.