Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Filter
Bank
Statistical Approach to Texture Classification from Single Image
Step
1:
Build
the
texton
dic;onary
4. Learning stage I: Generating the texton dictionary. Multiple, unregistered images from the training set of a particular tex
nvolved with a filter bank. The resultant filter responses are aggregated and clustered into textons using the K-Means algorithm
Varma
ifferent and
texture Zisserman
classes 2005
to form the texton dictionary.
are combined
Texton
dic9onary
built
from
coral
images
Step
2:
Build
models
of
the
textures
A
set
of
training
images
for
each
texture
are
ltered
and
the
dic9onary
textons
closest
to
the
lter
outputs
are
found.
The
re 4. Learning stagehI:istogram
of
textons
Generating the texton found
unregistered
dictionary. Multiple, in
the
images
image
fromforms
the
the training set ofm odel
texture
a particular
onvolved with a filter bank. The resultant filter responses are aggregated and clustered into textons using the K-Means algorithm. Te
corresponding
different texture classes are combined totform
o
the
training
the texton image.
dictionary.
Step
3:
Texture
recogni;on
e 6. Classification stage. A novel image is classified by forming its histogram and then using a nearest neighbour classifier to pi
st model to it (in the 2 sense). The novel image is declared as belonging to the texture class of the closest model.
Problems
While
the
papers
report
good
results
I
am
having
trouble
replica9ng
them.
Dont
know
which
lters
produce
the
most
useful
data
for
separa9ng
dierent
textures.
Decision
Trees:
Finds
data
features
and
thresholds
that
best
splits
the
data
into
separate
classes.
This
is
repeated
recursively
un9l
data
has
been
split
into
homogeneous
(or
mostly
homogeneous)
groups.
Can
immediately
iden9fy
the
features
that
are
most
important.
Random
Forests:
An
ensemble
of
decision
trees.
During
learning
tree
nodes
are
split
using
a
random
subset
of
data
features.
All
trees
vote
to
produce
a
nal
answer.
Can
be
one
of
the
most
accurate
techniques.
Machine
Learning
Algorithms
Expecta;on
maximiza;on
(EM)
Maximum
Likelihood
Es;ma;on
(MLE):
Typically
we
assume
the
data
is
a
mixture
of
Gaussians.
In
this
case
EM
ts
N
mul9dimensional
Gaussians
to
the
data.
User
has
to
specify
N.
Neural
Networks
/
Mul;layer
Perceptron:
Slow
to
train
but
fast
to
run,
design
is
a
bit
of
an
art
but
can
the
the
best
performer
on
some
problems.
True
Bias:
The
model
assump9ons
are
too
strong.
It
cannot
t
the
data
well.
Errors
on
training
data
and
on
test
data
will
be
large.
Model
11.73 11.32
12.48 12.10
11.75 11.28
Longitude < -117.545
12.53
Latitude < 33.725 Latitude < 33.59
Longitude < -116.33
12.54 12.14 11.63
12.09 11.16
Recursive
par;;oning
of
the
data
Deciding
how
to
split
nodes
A nice split
Condi9on?
true
false
Deciding
how
to
split
nodes
Condi9on?
true
false
Deciding
how
to
split
nodes
Which
a]ribute
of
the
data
at
a
node
provides
the
highest
informa9on
gain?
Low
entropy
High
entropy
Entropy:
H(X)
=
-
pi
log
pi
Specic
Condi;onal
Entropy:
H(X
|
Y=v)
=
The
entropy
of
X
among
only
those
records
in
which
Y
=
v
Condi;onal
Entropy:
H(X
|
Y)
=
The
average
specic
condi9onal
entropy
of
X
=
Prob(Y=vj)
H(X
|
Y
=
vj)
Informa;on
Gain:
IG(X
|
Y)
=
H(X)
H(X
|
Y)
H(X)
indicates
the
randomness
of
X
H(X
|
Y)
indicates
the
randomness
of
X
assuming
I
know
Y
The
dierence,
H(X)
H(X
|
Y),
indicates
the
reduc9on
in
randomness
achieved
by
knowing
Y
Entropy
Specic
condi9onal
entropy
H(X
|
Y
=
v2)
Condi9onal
Entropy
H(X
|
Y
=
v3)
Informa;on
Gain
from
thresholding
a
real-valued
aWribute
Dene
IG(X
|
Y:t)
as
H(X)
H(X
|
Y:t)
Dene
H(X
|
Y:t)
=
H(X
|
Y<t)
P(Y
<
t)
+
H(X
|
Y>=
t)
P(Y
>=
t)
IG(X
|
Y:t)
is
the
informa9on
gain
for
predic9ng
X
if
all
you
know
is
whether
Y
is
less
than
or
greater
than
t
A
Decision
Tree
represents
a
structured
plan
of
a
set
of
a]ributes
to
test
in
order
to
predict
the
output.
Then recurse
Stop
when:
All
records
at
a
node
have
the
same
output,
or
All
records
at
a
node
have
the
same
a]ributes,
in
this
case
we
make
a
classica9on
based
on
the
majority
output.
This led to the idea of using mul9ple trees to vote for a result.
For
the
use
of
mul9ple
trees
to
be
most
eec9ve
the
trees
should
be
independent
as
possible.
Splinng
using
a
random
subset
of
features
hopefully
achieves
this.
Seem
to
work
slightly
be]er
than
Random
Forests.
Though
this
may
be
a
result
of
the
slightly
dierent
informa9on
gain
score
used.
Completely
random
trees
can
also
work
well.
Here
a
single
a]ribute
is
selected
at
random
for
each
split.
No
evalua9on
of
the
a]ribute
split
is
therefore
needed.
Trees
are
trivial
to
generate.
Pierre
Guerts,
D
Ernst,
L
Wehenkel
Extremely
Randomized
Trees
Machine
Learning
Vol
63
No
1.
2006
Mach Learn ()
Some
results
taken
from
Geurts
paper
3. For
each
data
point
randomly
choose
a
new
value
for
the
feature
variable
from
among
the
values
that
the
feature
has
in
the
rest
of
the
data
set.
(This
ensures
the
distribu9on
of
the
feature
values
remains
unchanged
but
the
meaning
of
the
feature
variable
is
destroyed.)
4. Train
the
classier
on
the
altered
data
and
measure
its
accuracy.
If
the
accuracy
is
degraded
badly
then
the
feature
is
very
important.
5. Restore
the
data
and
repeat
the
process
using
every
other
feature
variable.
The
result
will
be
an
ordering
of
each
feature
variable
by
its
importance.
Regression
Trees
vs
Classica;on
Trees
A
Regression
Tree
a]empts
to
predict
a
con9nuous
numerical
value
rather
than
a
discrete
classica9on.