4.8 Article

A Tree-Based Context Model for Object Recognition

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TPAMI.2011.119

关键词

Object recognition; scene analysis; Markov random fields; structural models; image databases

资金

  1. Shell International Exploration and Production, Inc.
  2. US Army Research Office [W911NF-06-1-0076]
  3. US National Science Foundation (NSF) [ISI 0747120]
  4. US Air Force Office of Scientific Research [FA9550-06-1-0324]
  5. Div Of Information & Intelligent Systems
  6. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [0747120] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There has been a growing interest in exploiting contextual information in addition to local features to detect and localize multiple object categories in an image. A context model can rule out some unlikely combinations or locations of objects and guide detectors to produce a semantically coherent interpretation of a scene. However, the performance benefit of context models has been limited because most of the previous methods were tested on data sets with only a few object categories, in which most images contain one or two object categories. In this paper, we introduce a new data set with images that contain many instances of different object categories, and propose an efficient model that captures the contextual information among more than a hundred object categories using a tree structure. Our model incorporates global image features, dependencies between object categories, and outputs of local detectors into one probabilistic framework. We demonstrate that our context model improves object recognition performance and provides a coherent interpretation of a scene, which enables a reliable image querying system by multiple object categories. In addition, our model can be applied to scene understanding tasks that local detectors alone cannot solve, such as detecting objects out of context or querying for the most typical and the least typical scenes in a data set.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据