4.2 Article

Multi-View Synthesis and Analysis Dictionaries Learning for Classification

期刊

IEICE TRANSACTIONS ON INFORMATION AND SYSTEMS
卷 E102D, 期 3, 页码 659-662

出版社

IEICE-INST ELECTRONICS INFORMATION COMMUNICATIONS ENG
DOI: 10.1587/transinf.2018EDL8107

关键词

multi-view dictionary learning; synthesis dictionary; analysis dictionary; uncorrelation term

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61702280]
  2. National Postdoctoral Program for Innovative Talents [BX20180146]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20170900]
  4. Natural Science Fund for Colleges and Universities in Jiangsu Province [17KJB520025]
  5. Scientific Research Staring Foundation for Introduced Talents in NJUPT (NUPTSF) [NY217009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recently, multi-view dictionary learning technique has attracted lots of research interest. Although several multi-view dictionary learning methods have been addressed, they can be further improved. Most of existing multi-view dictionary learning methods adopt the l(0) or l(1)-norm sparsity constraint on the representation coefficients, which makes the training and testing phases time-consuming. In this paper, we propose a novel multi-view dictionary learning approach named multi-view synthesis and analysis dictionaries learning (MSADL), which jointly learns multiple discriminant dictionary pairs with each corresponding to one view and containing a structured synthesis dictionary and a structured analysis dictionary. MSADL utilizes synthesis dictionaries to achieve class-specific reconstruction and uses analysis dictionaries to generate discriminative code coefficients by linear projection. Furthermore, we design an uncorrelation term for multi-view dictionary learning, such that the redundancy among synthesis dictionaries learned from different views can be reduced. Two widely used datasets are employed as test data. Experimental results demonstrate the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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

4.2
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