CVPR09 Introduction

Confluence of Visual Computing & Sparse Representation
Yi Ma
Electrical and Computer Engineering, UIUC & Visual Computing Group, MSRA
CVPR, June 19th, 2009
CONTEXT - Massive High-Dimensional Data
Recognition
Surveillance
Search and Ranking
Bioinformatics
The curse of dimensionality: increasingly demand inference with limited samples for very highdimensional data. The blessing of dimensionality: real data highly concentrate on low-dimensional, sparse, or degenerate structures in the high-dimensional space. But nothing is free: Gross errors and irrelevant measurements are now ubiquitous in massive cheap data.
CONTEXT - New Phenomena with High-Dimensional Data

KEY CHALLENGE: efficiently and reliably recover sparse or degenerate structures from high-dimensional data, despite gross observation errors.
A sobering message: human intuition is severely limited in highdimensional spaces:
Gaussian samples in 2D
As dimension grows proportionally with the number of samples
A new regime of geometry, statistics, and computation
CONTEXT - High-dimensional Geometry, Statistics, Computation

Exciting confluence of
Analytical Tools:
Powerful tools from high-dimensional geometry, measure concentration, combinatorics, coding theory
Computational Tools:
Linear programming, convex optimization, greedy pursuit,
boosting, parallel processing
Practical Applications:
Compressive sensing, sketching, sampling, audio, image, video, bioinformatics, classification, recognition
THIS TALK - Outline

PART I: Face recognition as sparse representation
Striking robustness to corruption
PART II: From sparse to dense error correction

How is such good face recognition performance possible?
PART III: A practical face recognition system

Alignment, illumination, scalability
PART IV: Extensions, other applications, and future directions
Part I: Key Ideas and Application Robust Face Recognition via Sparse Representation
CONTEXT Face recognition: hopes and high-profile failures

# Pentagon Makes Rush Order for Anti-Terror Technology. Washington Post, Oct. 26, 2001. # Boston Airport to Test Face Recognition System. CNN.com, Oct. 26, 2001. # Facial Recognition Technology Approved at Va. Beach. 13News (wvec.com), Nov. 13, 2001.
# ACLU: Face-Recognition Systems Won't Work. ZDNet, Nov. 2, 2001. # ACLU Warns of Face Recognition Pitfalls. Newsbytes, Nov. 2, 2001.
# Identix, Visionics Double Up. CNN / Money Magazine, Feb. 22, 2002. # 'Face testing' at Logan is found lacking. Boston Globe, July 17, 2002. # Reliability of face scan technology in dispute . Boston Globe, August 5, 2002. # Tampa drops face-recognition system. CNET, August 21, 2003. # Airport anti-terror systems flub tests. USA Today, September 2, 2003. # Anti-terror face recognition system flunks tests. The Register, September 3, 2003. # Passport ID technology has high error rate . The Washington Post, August 6, 2004. # Smiling Germans ruin biometric passport system. VNUNet, November 10, 2005. # U.K. cops look into face-recognition tech. ZDNet News, January 17, 2006. # Police build national mugshot database . Silicon.com, January 16, 2006. # Face Recognition Algorithms Surpass Humans matching faces, PAMI, 2007. # 100% Accuracy in Automatic Face Recognition, Science, 2008., January 25, 2008
and the drama goes on and on
FORMULATION Face recognition under varying illumination

Face Subspaces
Training Images
Images of the same face under varying illumination lie approximately on a low (nine)-dimensional subspace, known as the harmonic plane [Basri & Jacobs, PAMI, 2003].
FORMULATION Face recognition as sparse representation

Assumption: the test image, , linear combination of k training images, say , can be expressed as a of the same subject:
The solution, , , should be a sparse vector of its entries should be zero, except for the ones associated with the correct subject.
ROBUST RECOGNITION Occlusion + varying illumination
ROBUST RECOGNITION Occlusion and Corruption
ROBUST RECOGNITION Properties of the Occlusion
Several characteristics of occlusion
Randomly supported errors (location is unknown and unpredictable)
Gross errors (arbitrarily large in magnitude)

Sparse errors? (concentrated on relatively small part(s) of the image)
ROBUST RECOGNITION Problem Formulation

Problem: Find the correct (sparse) solution from the corrupted and overdetermined system of linear equations:
Conventionally, the minimum 2-norm (least squares) solution is used:
ROBUST RECOGNITION Joint Sparsity
Thus, we are looking for a sparse solution system of linear equations
to an under-determined :
The problem can be solved efficiently via Linear Programming, and the solution is stable under moderate noise [Candes & Tao04, Donoho04].
The equivalence holds iff .
Wright, Yang, Ganesh, Sastry, and Ma. Robust Face Recognition via Sparse Representation, PAMI 2009
ROBUST RECOGNITION Geometric Interpretation
Face recognition as determining which facet of the polytope the test image belongs to.
ROBUST RECOGNITION - L1 versus L2 Solution
Input:
ROBUST RECOGNITION Classification from Coefficients
123 subject 1 subject i
N subject n
123 subject i
Classification criterion: assign to the class with the smallest residual.
ROBUST RECOGNITION Algorithm Summary
EXPERIMENTS Varying Level of Random Corruption

Extended Yale B Database (38 subjects) Training: subsets 1 and 2 (717 images) Testing: subset 3 (453 images)
30% corruption
99.3% 90.7%
50%
37.5%
70%
EXPERIMENTS Varying Levels of Contiguous Occlusion

Extended Yale B Database (38 subjects) Training: subsets 1 and 2 (717 images), EBP ~ 13.3%. Testing: subset 3 (453 images)
98.5% 90.3%
65.3%
30% occlusion
EXPERIMENTS Recognition with Face Parts Occluded
Results corroborate findings in human vision: the eyebrow or eye region is most informative for recognition [Sinha06]. However, the difference is less significant for our algorithm than for humans.
EXPERIMENTS Recognition with Disguises
The AR Database (100 subjects) Training: 799 images (un-occluded) EBP = 11.6%. Testing: 200 images (with glasses) 200 images (with scarf)
Part II: Theory Inspired by Face Recognition
Dense Error Correction via L1 Minimization
PRIOR WORK - Face Recognition as Sparse Representation

Represent any test image wrt the entire training set as
Test image
Training dictionary
coefficients
corruption, occlusion
Solution is not but only supported on images of the same subject should be unique sparse: ideally, expected to be sparse: occlusion only affects a subset of the pixels Seek the sparsest solution:
convex relaxation
PRIOR WORK - Striking Robustness to Random Corruption

Behavior under varying levels of random pixel corruption:
Recognition rate 99.3% 90.7%
37.5%
Can existing theory explain this phenomenon?
PRIOR WORK - Error Correction by

Candes and Tao [IT 05] : Apply parity check matrix Set Recover from clean system s.t.
minimization
, yielding
Underdetermined system in sparse e only

minimization
, yielding
Succeeds whenever
in the reduced system

minimization
, yielding
Succeeds whenever
This work:
Instead solve
Can be applied when A is wide (no parity check).

minimization
, yielding
Succeeds whenever
This work:
Instead solve
Succeeds whenever
in the expanded system
PRIOR WORK -
Equivalence in
Algebraic sufficient conditions:

(In)-coherence suffices.
Gribvonel + Nielsen 03
Donoho + Elad 03
Restricted Isometry
Candes + Tao 05 Candes + Tao + Romberg 06
suffices.
The columns of
should be uniformly well-spread
FACE IMAGES - Contrast with Existing Theory

Face images
Highly coherent ( volume Image space )
very sparse:
# images per subject, often nonnegative (illumination cone models).
as dense as possible: robust to highest possible corruption.
Existing theory:
should not succeed.
Wright, and Ma. ICASSP 2009, submitted to IEEE Trans. Information Theory.
SIMULATION - Dense Error Correction?

As dimension , an even more striking phenomenon emerges:





Conjecture: If the matrices are sufficiently coherent, then for any error fraction , as , solving
corrects almost any error
with
DATA MODEL - Cross-and-Bouquet

Our model for should capture the fact that the columns are tightly clustered around a common mean :
Face images
L^-norm of deviations wellcontrolled ( -> v )
Image space Mean is mostly incoherent with standard (error) basis
We call this the Cross-and-Bouquet (CAB) model.
ASYMPTOTIC SETTING - Weak Proportional Growth
Observation dimension Problem size grows proportionally: Error support grows proportionally: Support size sublinear in :
Sublinear growth of Need at least
is necessary to correct arbitrary fractions of errors: clean equations.

MAIN RESULT - Correction of Arbitrary Error Fractions

Recall notation:
recovers any sparse signal from almost any error with density less than 1
SIMULATION - Comparison to Alternative Approaches
L1 - [A I]:
L1 - comp:
ROMP: Regularized orthogonal matching pursuit
Candes + Tao 05 Needell + Vershynin 08
SIMULATION - Arbitrary Errors in WPG
Fraction of correct successes for increasing m (
IMPLICATIONS (1) - Error Correction with Real Faces

For real face images, weak proportional growth corresponds to the setting where the total image resolution grows proportionally to the size of the database.
Fraction of correct recoveries
Above: corrupted images. ( 50% probability of correct recovery ) Below: reconstruction.
IMPLICATIONS (2) Verification via Sparsity

Valid Subject
Invalid Subject
Reject as invalid if Sparsity Concentration Index
IMPLICATIONS (2) Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC)

Yale Extended B, 19 valid subjects, 19 invalid, under different levels of occlusions:
0%
10%
20%
30%
50%
IMPLICATIONS (3) - Communications through Bad Channels
Receiver Transmitter
Extremely corrupting channel
Transmitter encodes message
as
Receiver observes corrupted version linear programming.
, recovers
by
IMPLICATIONS (4) - Application to Information Hiding
Alice
Intentionally corrupts messages
Bob ????????? Eavesdropper

Knows , can recover by linear programming
Code breaking as a dictionary learning problem
Part III: A Practical Automatic Face Recognition System
FACE RECOGNITION Toward a Robust, Real-World System

So far: surprisingly good laboratory results, strong theoretical foundations.
Remaining obstacles to truly practical automatic face recognition: Pose and misalignment Obtaining sufficient training Scalability to large databases real face detector imprecision! which illuminations are truly needed? both in speed and accuracy.
All three difficulties can be addressed within the same unified framework of sparse representation.
FACE RECOGNITION Coupled Problems of Pose and Illumination
Sufficient training illuminations, but no explicit alignment:
Alignment corrected, but insufficient training illuminations:
Robust alignment and training set selection:
Recognition succeeds
ROBUST POSE AND ALIGNMENT Problem Formulation

What if the input image is misaligned, or has some pose?
If
were known, still have a sparse representation
Seek the
that gives the sparsest representation:
Wagner, Wright, Ganesh, Zhou and Ma. To appear in CVPR 09
POSE AND ALIGNMENT Iterative Linear Programming

Robust alignment as sparse representation:
Nonconvex in
Linearize about current estimate of
Linear program
Solve, set
POSE AND ALIGNMENT How well does it work?

Succeeds up to >45o of pose::
Succeeds up to translations of 20% of face width, up to 30o in-plane rotation::
Recognition rate for synthetic misalignments (Multi-PIE)
POSE AND ALIGNMENT L1 vs L2 solutions

Crucial role of sparsity in robust alignment:
Minimum -norm solution
Least-squares solution
POSE AND ALIGNMENT Algorithm details

First align to each subject separately
Efficient multi-scale implementation
Select k subjects with smallest global sparse representation
, classify based on
Excellent classification, validation and robustness with a linear-time algorithm that is efficient in practice and highly parallelizable.
LARGE-SCALE EXPERIMENTS Multi-PIE Database

Training: 249 subjects appearing in Session 1, 9 illuminations per subject.
Testing: 336 subjects appearing in Sessions 2,3,4. All 18 illuminations.
Examples of failures: Drastic changes in personal appearance over time
LARGE-SCALE EXPERIMENTS Multi-PIE Database

Training: 249 subjects appearing in Session 1, 9 illuminations per subject.
Testing: 336 subjects appearing in Sessions 2,3,4. All 18 illuminations.
Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Validation performance: Is the subject in the database of 249 people? NN, NS, LDA not much better than chance. Our method achieves an equal error rate of < 10%.
Robust alignment and training set selection:
Recognition succeeds
ACQUISITION SYSTEM Efficient training collection

Generate different illuminations by reflecting light from DLP projectors off walls, onto subject:
Fast: hundreds of images in a matter of seconds, flexible and easy to assemble.

WHICH ILLUMINATIONS ARE NEEDED?

Real data representation error as a function of Coverage of the sphere Granularity of the partition
Rear illuminations!
32 illumination cells
Rear illuminations are critical for representing real world variability

Missing from standard data sets such as AR, PIE, MultiPIE!
30-40 distinct illumination patterns suffice
REAL-WORLD EXPERIMENTS Our Dataset

Sufficient set of 38 training illuminations:
Recognition performance over 74 subjects:

Subset 1 Subset 2 Subset 3 Subset 4 Subset 5
95.9% rec. rate 91.5% rec. rate 62.3% rec. rate 73.7% rec. rate 53.5% rec. rate
Part IV: Extensions, Other Applications, and Future Directions
EXTENSIONS (1) Topological Sparse Solutions

Recognition rate 99.3% 90.7%
37.5%
98.5%
90.3%
65.3%
EXTENSIONS (1) Topological Sparse Solutions

How to better exploit the spatial characteristics of the error e in face recognition? Simple solution: Markov random field and L1 minimization.
60% occlusion
Query image
recovered error support
recovered error
recovered image
Longer-term direction: Sparse representation on structured domains (ala [Baraniuk 08, Do 07]):
Z. Zhou, A. Wagner, J. Wright, and Ma. Submitted to ICCV09.
EXTENSIONS (2) Does Feature Selection Matter?
12x10 pixels
120 dim
120 dim Wright, Yang, Ganesh, Sastry, and Ma. Robust Face Recognition via Sparse Representation, PAMI 2009
Compressed sensing:
Number of linear measurements is more important than specific details of how those measurements are taken.
d > 2k log (N/d) random measurements suffice to efficiently reconstruct any k-sparse signal. [Donoho and Tanner 07]

Extended Yale B: 38 subjects, 2,414 images of size 192x168 Training: 1,207 random images, Testing: remaining 1,207 images
OTHER APPLICATIONS (1) - Image Super-resolution

Enhance images by sparse representation in coupled dictionaries
(high- and low-resolution) of image patches:
MRF / BP
[Freeman IJCV 00]
Soft edge prior [Dai ICCV 07]
Our method
Original Original
J. Yang, Wright, Huang, and Ma. CVPR 2008
OTHER APPLICATIONS (2) - Face Hallucination
J. Yang, H. Tangt, Huang, and Ma. ICIP 2008
OTHER APPLICATIONS (3) - Activity Detection & Recognition
Precision: 98.8% and recall: 94.2%, far better than other existing detectors & classifier
A. Yang et. al. (at UC Berkeley). CVPR 2008
OTHER APPLICATIONS (4) - Robust Motion Segmentation
deals with incomplete or mistracked features with dataset 80% corrupted!

S. Rao, R. Tron, R. Vidal, and Ma. CVPR 2008
OTHER APPLICATIONS (5) - Data Imputation in Speech
91% at SNR -5dB on AURORA-2 compared to 61% with conventional
J.F. Gemmeke and G. Cranen, EUSIPCO08
FUTURE WORK (1) High-Dimensional Pattern Recognition

Toward an understanding of high-dimensional pattern classification
Data tasks beyond error correction:
Excellent classification performance even with high-coherent dictionary
Excellent validation behavior based on sparsity of the solution
Understanding either behavior requires a much more expressive model for what happens inside the bouquet?
FUTURE WORK (2) From Sparse Vectors to Low-Rank Matrices
D - observation
A low-rank
E sparse error
Robust PCA Problem: given D, recover A.
convex relaxation
Nuclear norm
Wright, Ganesh, Rao and Ma, submitted to the Journal of the ACM.
ROBUST PCA Which matrices and which errors?
Random orthogonal model (of rank r) [Candes & Recht 08]: independent samples from invariant measure on Steifel manifold of orthobases of rank r. arbitrary.
Bernoulli error signs-and-support (with parameter
):
Magnitude of
is arbitrary.
MAIN RESULT Exact Solution of Robust PCA
Convex optimization recovers almost any matrix of rank O(m/log m) from errors affecting O(m2) of the observations!
ROBUST PCA Contrast with literature

[Chandrasekharan et. al. 2009]:
Correct recovery whp for

Only guarantees recovery from vanishing fractions of errors, even when r = O(1).
This work: Correct recovery whp for , even with
Key technique: Iterative surgery for producing a certifying dual vector (extends [Wright and Ma 08]).
BONUS RESULT Matrix completion in proportional growth
Convex optimization exactly recovers matrices of rank O(m), even when O(m2) entries are missing!
MATRIX COMPLETION Contrast with literature

[Candes and Tao 2009]:
Correct completion whp for

Empty for
This work: Correct completion whp for , even with
Exploits rich regularity and independence in random orthogonal model.
Caveats: - [C-T 09] tighter for small r. - [C-T 09] generalizes better to other matrix ensembles.
FUTURE WORK (2) Robust PCA via Iterative Thresholding

Efficient solutions to ? Semidefinite program in millions of unknowns!
Shrink singular values repeat Shrink absolute values
Provable (and efficient) convergence to global optimum.
Future direction: sampling approximations to the singular value thresholding operator [Rudelson and Vershynin 08] ?
FUTURE WORK (2) - Video Coding and Anomaly Detection

Videos are highly coherent data. Errors correspond to pixels that cannot be well interpolated by the previous video.
550 frames, 64 x 80 pixels, significant illumination variation
Video
Low-rank appx.
Sparse error
Background variation
Anomalous activity
FUTURE WORK (2) - Background modeling

Static camera surveillance video 200 frames, 72 x 88 pixels, Significant foreground motion
Video
Low-rank appx.
Sparse error
FUTURE WORK (2) - Face under different illuminations

Original images
Ext. Yale B database, 29 images of one subject. Images are 96 x 84 pixels.
Low-rank appx.
Sparse error
CONCLUSIONS
Analytic and algorithmic tools from sparse representation lead to a new approach in face recognition: Robustness to corruption and occlusion Performance exceeds expectation & human ability Face recognition reveals new phenomena in high-dim statistics & geometry: Dense error correction with a coherent dictionary Recovery of corrupt low-rank matrices Theoretical insights to mathematical models lead back to practical gains
Robust to misalignment, illumination, and occlusion

Scalable in both computation and performance in realistic scenarios MANY NEW APPLICATIONS BEYOND FACE RECOGNITION
REFERENCES + ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
- Robust Face Recognition via Sparse Representation IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, February 2009. - Dense Error Correction via L1-minimization ICASSP 2008, Submitted to IEEE Trans. Information Theory, September 2008. - Towards a Practical Face Recognition System: Robust Alignment and Illumination via Sparse Representation IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, June 2009. - Robust Principal Component Analysis: Exact Recovery of Corrupted Low-Rank Matrices by Convex Optimization Submitted to the Journal of the ACM, May 2009.
John Wright, Allen Yang, Andrew Wagner, Arvind Ganesh, Zihan Zhou
This work was funded by NSF, ONR, and MSR

Yi Ma Confluence of Computer Vision and Sparse Representation
THANK YOU
Questions, please?
EXPERIMENTS Design of Robust Training Sets

The Equivalence Breakdown Point
Extended Yale B
AR Database
Bounding EBP, submitted to ACC 09, Sharon, Wright, and Ma
FEATURE SELECTION Extended Yale B Database

38 subjects, 2,414 images of size 192x168 Training: 1,207 random images, Testing: remaining 1,207 images
Dimension (d) Eigen [%] Laplacian [%] Random[%] 30 80.0 80.6 81.9 56 89.6 91.7 90.8 120 94.0 93.9 95.0 504 97.0 96.5 96.8
L1
Downsample[%]
Fisher[%]
76.2
85.9
87.6
N/A
92.7
N/A
96.9
N/A
Nearest Neighbor
Dimension (d) Eigen [%] Laplacian [%] 30 72.0 75.6 56 79.8 81.3 120 83.9 85.2 504 85.8 87.7 Eigen [%]
Nearest Subspace
Dimension (d) Laplacian [%] 30 89.9 89.0 56 91.1 90.4 120 92.5 91.9 504 93.2 93.4
Random[%]
Downsample[%] Fisher[%]
60.1
46.7 87.7
66.5
54.7 N/A
67.8
61.8 N/A
66.4
65.4 N/A
Random[%]
87.4
80.8 81.9
91.5
88.2 N/A
93.9
91.1 N/A
94.1
93.4 N/A
FEATURE SELECTION AR Database

100 subjects, 1,400 images of size 165x120 Training: 700 images, varying lighting, expression Testing: 700 images from second session
FEATURE SELECTION AR Database

100 subjects, 1,400 images of size 165x120 Training: 700 images, varying lighting, expression Testing: 700 images from second session
Dimension (d)
Eigen [%] Laplacian [%] Random[%] Downsample[%] Fisher[%]
30
71.1 73.7 57.8 46.8 87.0
56
80.0 84.7 75.5 67.0 92.3
120
85.7 91.0 87.5 84.6 N/A
504
92.0 94.3 94.7 93.9 N/A
L1
Nearest Neighbor
Dimension (d) Eigen [%] Laplacian [%] 30 68.1 73.1 56 74.8 77.1 120 79.3 83.8 504 80.5 89.7 Eigen [%] Laplacian [%]
Nearest Subspace
Dimension (d) 30 64.1 66.0 56 77.1 77.5 120 82.0 84.3 504 85.1 90.3
Random[%]
56.7
51.7 83.4
63.7
60.9 86.8
71.4
69.2 N/A
75.0
73.7 N/A
Random[%]
59.2
56.2 80.3
68.2
67.7 85.8
80.0
77.0 N/A
83.3
82.1 N/A
FEATURE SELECTION Recognition with Face Parts

Feature Masks Examples of Test Features
Features
nose
right eye
mouch & chin
Dimension
L1 NN NS SVM
4,270
87.3% 49.2% 83.7% 70.8%
5,050
93.7% 68.8% 78.6% 85.8%
12,936
98.3% 72.7% 94.4% 95.3%
NOTATION - Correct Recovery of Solutions

Whether is recovered depends only on
Call
-recoverable if
with these signs and support
and the minimizer is unique.
PROOF (1) - Problem Geometry

Consider a fixed
Success iff
. W.l.o.g., let
Restrict to
and write
With some manipulation, optimality condition becomes

Consider a fixed
Success iff
. W.l.o.g., let
Restrict to
and write
With some manipulation, optimality condition becomes

Introduce
The NSC
hyperplane
and the unit ball of are disjoint.

Introduce
The NSC
hyperplane

Introduce
The NSC
hyperplane

is a complicated polytope.
Instead look for a hyperplane separating and
in the higher-dimensional space.
PROOF (2) - When Does the Iteration Succeed?

Lemma: success if Proof: want to show Consider the three statements:

Base case:
Trivial Use that

Inductive step:

Inductive step (contd):
Magnitude

Inductive step (contd):

CVPR09 Introduction

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CVPR09 Introduction

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Confluence of Visual Computing & Sparse Representation

CVPR, June 19th, 2009

CONTEXT - Massive High-Dimensional Data

Search and Ranking

CONTEXT - New Phenomena with High-Dimensional Data

A sobering message: human intuition is severely limited in highdimensional spaces:

As dimension grows proportionally with the number of samples

A new regime of geometry, statistics, and computation

CONTEXT - High-dimensional Geometry, Statistics, Computation

THIS TALK - Outline

PART II: From sparse to dense error correction

PART III: A practical face recognition system

PART IV: Extensions, other applications, and future directions

CONTEXT Face recognition: hopes and high-profile failures

and the drama goes on and on

FORMULATION Face recognition under varying illumination

FORMULATION Face recognition as sparse representation

ROBUST RECOGNITION Occlusion + varying illumination

ROBUST RECOGNITION Occlusion and Corruption

ROBUST RECOGNITION Properties of the Occlusion

Several characteristics of occlusion

Randomly supported errors (location is unknown and unpredictable)

Gross errors (arbitrarily large in magnitude)

ROBUST RECOGNITION Problem Formulation

Conventionally, the minimum 2-norm (least squares) solution is used:

ROBUST RECOGNITION Joint Sparsity

Thus, we are looking for a sparse solution system of linear equations

ROBUST RECOGNITION Geometric Interpretation

ROBUST RECOGNITION - L1 versus L2 Solution

ROBUST RECOGNITION Classification from Coefficients

123 subject 1 subject i

Classification criterion: assign to the class with the smallest residual.

ROBUST RECOGNITION Algorithm Summary

EXPERIMENTS Varying Level of Random Corruption

EXPERIMENTS Varying Levels of Contiguous Occlusion

EXPERIMENTS Recognition with Face Parts Occluded

EXPERIMENTS Recognition with Disguises

Part II: Theory Inspired by Face Recognition

Dense Error Correction via L1 Minimization

PRIOR WORK - Face Recognition as Sparse Representation

PRIOR WORK - Striking Robustness to Random Corruption

Can existing theory explain this phenomenon?

PRIOR WORK - Error Correction by

Underdetermined system in sparse e only

PRIOR WORK - Error Correction by

Underdetermined system in sparse e only

in the reduced system

PRIOR WORK - Error Correction by

Underdetermined system in sparse e only

in the reduced system

Can be applied when A is wide (no parity check).

PRIOR WORK - Error Correction by

Underdetermined system in sparse e only

in the reduced system

in the expanded system

Algebraic sufficient conditions:

Candes + Tao 05 Candes + Tao + Romberg 06

should be uniformly well-spread

FACE IMAGES - Contrast with Existing Theory

Highly coherent ( volume Image space )

# images per subject, often nonnegative (illumination cone models).

as dense as possible: robust to highest possible corruption.

should not succeed.