Let's assume that I have 10 different objects and for each object I have 100 corresponding images. I want to run any machine learning algorithm to classify whether an object is type 0, type 1 etc.
Assuming that each object type is different from each other (EX: object 1: Cat, object 2: Motorcycle, object 3: Trees) what are the possible features for these images to extract to be able to do some classification on them?
Since, you have limited training data, I would suggest you to use bag of words approach along with K- means for clustering.
As far as features are concerned, you can extract SIFT features or SURF features or you could even take the filter responses of Laplacian of Gaussian filter for some random pixels.
If you used a fully connected Deep Neural Network then you would't really have to specify features. The input would just be the pixels. If you wanted to use a SVM then maybe extract a histogram from each image or something, but that probably wouldn't be as effective.
Related
I dont mean that a neural network can complete the work of traditional image processing algorithm.What i want to say is if it exists a kind of neural network can use the parameters of the traditional method as input and outputs more universal parameters that dont require manual adjustment.Intuitively, my ideas are less efficient than using neural networks directly，but I don't know much about the mathematics of neural networks.
If I understood correctly, what you mean is for a traditional method (let's say thresholding), you want to find the best parameters using ann. It is possible but you have to supply so many training data which needs to be created, processed and evaluated that it will take a lot of time. AFAIK many mobile phones that have AI assisted camera use this method to find the best aperture, exposure..etc.
First of all, thank you very much. I still have two things to figure out. If I wanted to get a (or a set of) relatively optimal parameters, what data set would I need to build (such as some kind of error between input and output and threshold) ? Second, as you give an example, is it more efficient or better than traversal or Otsu to select the optimal threshold through neural networks in practice?To be honest, I wonder if this is really more efficient than training input and output directly using neural networks
For your second question, Otsu only works on cases where the histogram has two distinct peaks. Thresholding is a simple function but the cut-off value is based on your objective; there is no single "best" value valid for every case. So if you want to train a model for thresholding, I think you have to come up with separate models for each case (like a model for thresholding bright objects, another for darker ones...etc.) Maybe an additional output parameter for determining the aim works but I am not sure. Will it be more efficient and better? Depends on the case (and your definition of better). Otsu, traversal or adaptive thresholding does not work all the time (actually Otsu has very specific use cases). If they work for your case, excellent. If not, then things get messy. So to answer your question, it depends on your problem at hand.
For the first question, TBF, it is quite difficult to work with images in traditional ANNs. Images have a lot of pixels, so standard ANNs struggle with inputs. Moreover, when the location/scale of an object in the image changes, the whole pixel data changes even though the content is the same (These are the reasons why CNN's are superior to ANN's for images). For these reasons it is better to use processed metrics which contain condensed and location-invariant information. E.g. for thresholding, you can give the histogram and it returns a thresholding value. Therefore you need an ann with 256 input neurons (for an intensity histogram of 8bit grayscale image), 1 output neuron, and 1-2 middle layers with some deeply connected neurons (128 maybe?). Your training data will be a bunch of histograms as input and corresponding best threshold value for each histogram. Then once training is finished, you can give the ANN a histogram it has never seen before and it will tell you the optimal thresholding value based on its training.
what I want to do is a model that can output different parameters (parameter sets) based on different input images, so I think if you choose a good enough data set it should be somewhat universal.
Most likely, but your data set should be quite inclusive of expected images (in terms of metrics and features), which means it has to be large.
Also, I don't know much about modeling -- can I use a function about the output/parameters (which might be a function about the result of the traditional method) as an error in the back-propagation by create a custom loss function?
I think so, but training the model will be more involved than using predefined loss functions because, well, you have to write them. Also you have to test they work as expected.
I've got this question here: For example, if it is necessary to predict a disease using both image data and some numeric data, so that the features would be like:
feature 1: image of the disease.
in shape: (batch_size, width,height)
feature 2: numeric data about the patient(age,height, sex, country, salary...)
in shape: (batch_size,number_of_numeric_features)
and the output of the model should be 0/1, 0 is healthy, 1 is sick.
I know one way is to use the flat feature as a shape: (width*height+number_of_numeric_feature)
in this case the advantage of CNN in image classification won't be utilized. (a feedforward network)
So my question is: is there a best solution to combine image feature and numeric feature using CNN?
Would adding numeric features as image pixels in one channel of the CNN feature helpful? in such case the positional distance of the numeric feature as pixels won't make any sense since they don't have relationship in distance of two pixels.
You should not use SUCH numerical data with CNN, as you mentioned yourself, it won't make any sense, but there is a way in which you could use your image with CNN, and use another network (e.g. MLP) for the numerical data, at the end, you can combine the output of MLP and CNN together and feed them to another MLP, or just take averages from their output and compare the results.
I am working on face recognition project using deep learning architecture to classify the images into respective classes. The output of network at softmax layer is the predicted class label and the output of last but one layer at the dense layer is a feature representation of the input image. Here the feature vector is a 1-D matrix of size 1000 for each image. Predicting classes is recognition type problem, but I'm interested in verification problem.
So given two sample images, I need to compare the similarity/dissimilarity score between two given images using their feature representations. If the match score is greater than the threshold then it's a hit else no hit. Please let me know if there are any standard approaches?
Example of similar faces (which should ideally generate matchscore>threshold): https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hires/2014/yvyughbujh.jpg
Your project has two solutions:
Train your own network (using pretrained one) with output in 1000 classes. This approach is not the simplest one because of the necessity of having enough (say huge) amount of data for each class, approximately 1000 samples per class.
Another approach is to use Distance Metrics Learning. By this "distance" we usually mean Euclidean norm. This approach is much wider and deeper than just extract features and match them to the nearest one. Try to search for it.
Good luck!
I have a collection of documents related to a particular domain and have trained the centroid classifier based on that collection. What I want to do is, I will be feeding the classifier with documents from different domains and want to determine how much they are relevant to the trained domain. I can use the cosine similarity for this to get a numerical value but my question is what is the best way to determine the threshold value?
For this, I can download several documents from different domains and inspect their similarity scores to determine the threshold value. But is this the way to go, does it sound statistically good? What are the other approaches for this?
Actually there is another issue with centroids in sparse vectors. The problem is that they usually are significantly less sparse than the original data. For examples, this increases computation costs. And it can yield vectors that are themselves actually atypical because they have a different sparsity pattern. This effect is similar to using arithmetic means of discrete data: say the mean number of doors in a car is 3.4; yet obviously no car exists that actually has 3.4 doors. So in particular, there will be no car with an euclidean distance of less than 0.4 to the centroid! - so how "central" is the centroid then really?
Sometimes it helps to use medoids instead of centroids, because they actually are proper objects of your data set.
Make sure you control such effects on your data!
A simple method to try would be to employ various machine-learning algorithms - and in particular, tree-based ones - on the distances from your centroids.
As mentioned in another answer(#Anony-Mousse), this won't necessarily provide you with good or usable answers, but it just might. Using a ML framework for this procedure, E.g. WEKA, will also help you with estimating your accuracy in a more rigorous manner.
Here are the steps to take, using WEKA:
Generate a train set by finding a decent amount of documents representing each of your classes (to get valid estimations, I'd recommend at least a few dozens per class)
Calculate the distance from each document to each of your centroids.
Generate a feature vector for each such document, composed of the distances from this document to the centroids. You can either use a single feature - the distance to the nearest centroid; or use all distances, if you'd like to try a more elaborate thresholding scheme. For example, if you chose the simpler method of using a single feature, the vector representing a document with a distance of 0.2 to the nearest centroid, belonging to class A would be: "0.2,A"
Save this set in ARFF or CSV format, load into WEKA, and try classifying, e.g. using a J48 tree.
The results would provide you with an overall accuracy estimation, with a detailed confusion matrix, and - of course - with a specific model, e.g. a tree, you can use for classifying additional documents.
These results can be used to iteratively improve the models and thresholds by collecting additional train documents for problematic classes, either by recreating the centroids or by retraining the thresholds classifier.
I have a large set of plant images labeled with the botanical name. What would be the best algorithm to use to train on this dataset in order to classify an unlabel photo? The photos are processed so that 100% of the pixels contain the plant (e.g. either closeups of the leaves or bark), so there are no other objects/empty-space/background that the algorithm would have to filter out.
I've already tried generating SIFT features for all the photos and feeding these (feature,label) pairs to a LibLinear SVM, but the accuracy was a miserable 6%.
I also tried feeding this same data to a few Weka classifiers. The accuracy was a little better (25% with Logistic, 18% with IBk), but Weka's not designed for scalability (it loads everything into memory). Since the SIFT feature dataset is a several million rows, I could only test Weka with a random 3% slice, so it's probably not representative.
EDIT: Some sample images:
Normally, you would not train on the SIFT features directly. Cluster them (using k-means) and then train on the histogram of cluster membership identifiers (i.e., a k-dimensional vector, which counts, at position i, how many features were assigned to the i-th cluster).
This way, you obtain a single output per image (and a single, k-dimensional, feature vector).
Here's the quasi-code (using mahotas and milk in Pythonn):
from mahotas.surf import surf
from milk.unsupervised.kmeans import kmeans,assign_centroids
import milk
# First load your data:
images = ...
labels = ...
local_features = [surfs(im, 6, 4, 2) for im in imgs]
allfeatures = np.concatenate(local_features)
_, centroids = kmeans(allfeatures, k=100)
histograms = []
for ls in local_features:
hist = assign_centroids(ls, centroids, histogram=True)
histograms.append(hist)
cmatrix, _ = milk.nfoldcrossvalidation(histograms, labels)
print "Accuracy:", (100*cmatrix.trace())/cmatrix.sum()
This is a fairly hard problem.
You can give BoW model a try.
Basically, you extract SIFT features on all the images, then use K-means to cluster the features into visual words. After that, use the BoW vector to train you classifiers.
See the Wikipedia article above and the references papers in that for more details.
You probably need better alignment, and probably not more features. There is no way you can get acceptable performance unless you have correspondences. You need to know what points in one leaf correspond to points on another leaf. This is one of the "holy grail" problems in computer vision.
People have used shape context for this problem. You should probably look at this link. This paper describes the basic system behind leafsnap.
You can implement the BoW model according to this Bag-of-Features Descriptor on SIFT Features with OpenCV. It is a very good tutorial to implement the BoW model in OpenCV.