I'm using Emgu CV to implement a machine learning technique in c# to classify pixels of my image into 3 different categories.
Everything works perfect so far, but the problem is that it is fully automatic. I want to make it semi-automatic which mean the user can "give weight" to each of those 3 outcomes. This is to give the user ability to well-tune the outcome.
Any idea how?
The first thing I can think of is to actually modify the input in a way that it would have bias to one of the outputs (for example make it more red by modifying red channel). But I though maybe there is a generic way of doing this that I'm not aware of.
Thanks.
Usually you'd do that by adapting the prior probabilities in the classification rule (what you get from the gaussian distributions is the likelyhood), but it seems that the implementation in emgucv does not allow you to do that.
Related
I have this project I'm working on. A part of the project involves multiple test runs during which screenshots of an application window are taken. Now, we have to ensure that screenshots taken between consecutive runs match (barring some allowable changes). These changes could be things like filenames, dates, different logos, etc. within the application window that we're taking a screenshot of.
I had the bright idea to automate the process of doing this checking. Essentially my idea was this. If I could somehow mathematically quantify the difference between a screenshot from the N-1th run and the Nth run, I could create a binary labelled dataset that mapped feature vectors of some sort to a label (0 for pass or 1 for fail if the images do not adequately match up). The reason for all of this was so that my labelled data would help make the model understand what scale of changes are acceptable, because there are so many kinds that are acceptable.
Now lets say I have access to lots of data that I have meticulously labelled, in the thousands. So far I have tried using SIFT in opencv using keypoint matching to determine a similarity score between images. But this isn't an intelligent, learning process. Is there some way I could take some information from SIFT and use it as my x-value in my dataset?
Here are my questions:
what would that be the information I need as my x-value? It needs to be something that represents the difference between two images. So maybe the difference between feature vectors from SIFT? What do I do when those vectors are of slightly different dimensions?
Am I on the right track with thinking about using SIFT? Should I look elsewhere and if so where?
Thanks for your time!
The approach that is being suggested in the question goes like this -
Find SIFT features of two consecutive images.
Use those to somehow quantify the similarity between two images (sounds reasonable)
Use this metric to first classify the images into similar and non-similar.
Use this dataset to train a NN do to the same job.
I am not completely convinced if this is a good approach. Let's say that you created the initial classifier with SIFT features. You are then using this data to train a NN. But this data will definitely have a lot of wrong labels. Because if it didn't have a lot of wrong labels, what's stopping you from using your original SIFT based classifier as your final solution?
So if your SIFT based classification is good, why even train a NN? On the other hand, if it's bad, you are giving a lot of wrong labeled data to the NN for training. I think the latter is a probably a bad idea. I say probably because there is a possibility that maybe the wrong labels just encourage the NN to generalize better, but that would require a lot of data, I imagine.
Another way to look at this is, let's say that your initial classifier is 90% accurate. That's probably the upper limit of the performance for the NN that you are looking at when talking about training it with this data.
You said that the issue that you have with your first approach is that 'it's not a an intelligent, learning process'. I think it's the wrong approach to think that the former approach is always inferior to the latter. SIFT is a powerful tool that can solve a lot of problems without all the 'black-boxness' of an NN. If this problem can be solved with sufficient accuracy using SIFT, I think going after a learning based approach is not the way to go, because again, a learning based approach isn't necessarily superior.
However, if the SIFT approach isn't giving you good enough results, definitely start thinking of NN stuff, but at that point, using the "bad" method to label the data is probably a bad idea.
Also in relation, I think you could potentially be underestimating the amount of data that is needed for this. You mentioned data in the thousands, but that's honestly, not a lot. You would need a lot more, I think.
One way I would think about instead doing this -
Do SIFT keyponits detection for a sample reference image.
Manually filter out keypoints that does not belong to the things in the image that are invariant. That is, just take keypoints at the locations in the image that is guaranteed (or very likely) to be always present.
When you get a new image, compute the keypoints and do matching with the reference image.
Set some threshold of the ratio of good matches to the total number of matches.
Depending on your application, this might give you good enough results.
If not, and if you really want your solution to be NN based, I would say you need to manually label the dataset as opposed to using SIFT.
I am using FCN (Fully Convolutional Networks) and trying to do image segmentation. When training, there are some areas which are mislabeled, however further training doesn't help much to make them go away. I believe this is because network learns about some features which might not be completely correct ones, but because there are enough correctly classified examples, it is stuck in local minimum and can't get out.
One solution I can think of is to train for an epoch, then validate the network on training images, and then adjust weights for mismatched parts to penalize mismatch more there in next epoch.
Intuitively, this makes sense to me - but I haven't found any writing on this. Is this a known technique? If yes, how is it called? If no, what am I missing (what are the downsides)?
It highly depends on your network structure. If you are using the original FCN, due to the pooling operations, the segmentation performance on the boundary of your objects is degraded. There have been quite some variants over the original FCN for image segmentation, although they didn't go the route you're proposing.
Just name a couple of examples here. One approach is to use Conditional Random Field (CRF) on top of the FCN output to refine the segmentation. You may search for the relevant papers to get more idea on that. In some sense, it is close to your idea but the difference is that CRF is separated from the network as a post-processing approach.
Another very interesting work is U-net. It employs some idea from the residual network (RES-net), which enables high resolution features from lower levels can be integrated into high levels to achieve more accurate segmentation.
This is still a very active research area. So you may bring the next break-through with your own idea. Who knows! Have fun!
First, if I understand well you want your network to overfit your training set ? Because that's generally something you don't want to see happening, because this would mean that while training your network have found some "rules" that enables it to have great results on your training set, but it also means that it hasn't been able to generalize so when you'll give it new samples it will probably perform poorly. Moreover, you never talk about any testing set .. have you divided your dataset in training/testing set ?
Secondly, to give you something to look into, the idea of penalizing more where you don't perform well made me think of something that is called "AdaBoost" (It might be unrelated). This short video might help you understand what it is :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjtSo-YWCjc
Hope it helps
I started learning Image Recognition a few days back and I would like to do a project in which it need to identify different brand logos in Android.
For Ex: If I take a picture of Nike logo in an Android device then it needs to display "Nike".
Low computational time would be the main criteria for me.
For this, I have done some work and started learning OpenCV sample examples.
What would be the best Image Recognition that would be used for me.
1) I came to know from Template Matching that their applicability is limited mostly by the available computational power, as identification of big and complex templates can be time consuming. (and so I don't want to use it)
2) Feature Based detectors like SIFT/SURF/STAR (As per my knowledge this would be a better option for me)
3) How about Deep Learning and Pattern recognition concepts? (I was digging on this and don't know whether it would be an option for me). Can any of you let me know whether I can use this and why it would be an better choice for me when compared with 1 and 2.
4) Haar caascade classifiers (From one of the posts in SO, I came to know that by using Haar it doesn't work in Rotation and Scale invariant and so I haven't concentrated much on this). Does this been a better Option for me If I focus up on.
I’m now running one of my pet projects and it's required face recognition – detecting the area with face on the photo, if it exists with Raspberry pi, so I’ve done some analysis about that task
And I found this approach. The key idea is in avoiding scanning entire picture to help by scanning windows of different sizes like it was in OpenCV, but by dividing an entire photo into 49 (7x7) squares and train the model not only for detecting of presenting one of classes inside each square, but also for determining the location and size of detecting object
It’s only 49 runs of trained model, so I think it's possible to execute this in less than in a second even on non state-of-the-art smartphones. Anyway, it will be a trade-off between accuracy and performance
About the model
I will use vgg –like model, probably a bit simpler than even vgg11A.
In my case ready dataset already exists. So I can train convolutional network with it
Why deep learning approach is better than 1-3 you mentioned? Because of its higher accuracy for such kind of tasks. It’s practically proven. You could check it in kaggle. Majority of the top models for classification competitions are based on convolutional networks
The only disadvantage for you – probably it would be necessary create your own dataset to train the model
Here is a post that I think can be useful for you: Image Processing: Algorithm Improvement for 'Coca-Cola Can' Recognition. Another one: Logo recognition in images.
2) Feature Based detectors like SIFT/SURF/STAR (As per my knowledge
this would be a better option for me)
Just remember that SIFT and SURF are both patented so you will need a license for any commercial use (free for non-commercial use).
4) Haar caascade classifiers (From one of the posts in SO, I came to know that by using Haar it doesn't work in Rotation and Scale invariant and so I haven't concentrated much on this). Does this been a better Option for me If I focus up on.
It works (if I understand your question right), much of this depends of how you trained your classifier. You could train it to detect all kind of rotations and scales. Anyways, I would discourage you to go for this option as I think the other possible solutions are better meant for the case.
4 years ago I posted this question and got a few answers that were unfortunately outside my skill level. I just attended a build tour conference where they spoke about machine learning and this got me thinking of the possibility of using ML as a solution to my problem. i found this on the azure site but i dont think it will help me because its scope is pretty narrow.
Here is what i am trying to achieve:
i have a source image:
and i want to which one of the following symbols (if any) are contained in the image above:
the compare needs to support minor distortion, scaling, color differences, rotation, and brightness differences.
the number of symbols to match will ultimately at least be greater than 100.
is ML a good tool to solve this problem? if so, any starting tips?
As far as I know, Project Oxford (MS Azure CV API) wouldn't be suitable for your task. Their APIs are very focused to Face related tasks (detection, verification, etc), OCR and Image description. And apparently you can't extend their models or train new ones from the existing ones.
However, even though I don't know an out of the box solution for your object detection problem; there are easy enough approaches that you could try and that would give you some start point results.
For instance, here is a naive method you could use:
1) Create your dataset:
This is probably the more tedious step and paradoxically a crucial one. I will assume you have a good amount of images to work with. What would you need to do is to pick a fixed window size and extract positive and negative examples.
If some of the images in your dataset are in different sizes you would need to rescale them to a common size. You don't need to get too crazy about the size, probably 30x30 images would be more than enough. To make things easier I would turn the images to gray scale too.
2) Pick a classification algorithm and train it:
There is an awful amount of classification algorithms out there. But if you are new to machine learning I will pick the one I would understand the most. Keeping that in mind, I would check out logistic regression which give decent results, it's easy enough for starters and have a lot of libraries and tutorials. For instance, this one or this one. At first I would say to focus in a binary classification problem (like if there is an UD logo in the picture or not) and when you master that one you can jump to the multi-class case. There are resources for that too or you can always have several models one per logo and run this recipe for each one separately.
To train your model, you just need to read the images generated in the step 1 and turn them into a vector and label them accordingly. That would be the dataset that will feed your model. If you are using images in gray scale, then each position in the vector would correspond to a pixel value in the range 0-255. Depending on the algorithm you might need to rescale those values to the range [0-1] (this is because some algorithms perform better with values in that range). Notice that rescaling the range in this case is fairly easy (new_value = value/255).
You also need to split your dataset, reserving some examples for training, a subset for validation and another one for testing. Again, there are different ways to do this, but I'm keeping this answer as naive as possible.
3) Perform the detection:
So now let's start the fun part. Given any image you want to run your model and produce coordinates in the picture where there is a logo. There are different ways to do this and I will describe one that probably is not the best nor the more efficient, but it's easier to develop in my opinion.
You are going to scan the picture, extracting the pixels in a "window", rescaling those pixels to the size you selected in step 1 and then feed them to your model.
If the model give you a positive answer then you mark that window in the original image. Since the logo might appear in different scales you need to repeat this process with different window sizes. You also would need to tweak the amount of space between windows.
4) Rinse and repeat:
At the first iteration it's very likely that you will get a lot of false positives. Then you need to take those as negative examples and retrain your model. This would be an iterative process and hopefully on each iteration you will have less and less false positives and fewer false negatives.
Once you are reasonable happy with your solution, you might want to improve it. You might want to try other classification algorithms like SVM or Deep Learning Artificial Neural Networks, or to try better object detection frameworks like Viola-Jones. Also, you will probably need to use crossvalidation to compare all your solutions (you can actually use crossvalidation from the beginning). By this moment I bet you would be confident enough that you would like to use OpenCV or another ready to use framework in which case you will have a fair understanding of what is going on under the hood.
Also you could just disregard all this answer and go for an OpenCV object detection tutorial like this one. Or take another answer from another question like this one. Good luck!
for my final thesis i am trying to build up an 3d face recognition system by combining color and depth information. the first step i did, is to realign the data-head to an given model-head using the iterative closest point algorithm. for the detection step i was thinking about using the libsvm. but i dont understand how to combine the depth and the color information to one feature vector? they are dependent information (each point consist of color (RGB), depth information and also scan quality).. what do you suggest to do? something like weighting?
edit:
last night i read an article about SURF/SIFT features i would like to use them! could it work? the concept would be the following: extracting this features out of the color image and the depth image (range image), using each feature as a single feature vector for the svm?
Concatenation is indeed a possibility. However, as you are working on 3d face recognition you should have some strategy as to how you go about it. Rotation and translation of faces will be hard to recognize using a "straightforward" approach.
You should decide whether you attempt to perform a detection of the face as a whole, or of sub-features. You could attempt to detect rotation by finding some core features (eyes, nose, etc).
Also, remember that SVMs are inherently binary (i.e. they separate between two classes). Depending on your exact application you will very likely have to employ some multi-class strategy (One-against-all or One-against-many).
I would recommend doing some literature research to see how others have attacked the problem (a google search will be a good start).
It sounds simple, but you can simply concatenate the two vectors into one. Many researchers do this.
What you arrived at is an important open problem. Yes, there are some ways to handle it, as mentioned here by Eamorr. For example you can concatenate and do PCA (or some non linear dimensionality reduction method). But it is kind of hard to defend the practicality of doing so, considering that PCA takes O(n^3) time in the number of features. This alone might be unreasonable for data in vision that may have thousands of features.
As mentioned by others, the easiest approach is to simply combine the two sets of features into one.
SVM is characterized by the normal to the maximum-margin hyperplane, where its components specify the weights/importance of the features, such that higher absolute values have a larger impact on the decision function. Thus SVM assigns weights to each feature all on its own.
In order for this to work, obviously you would have to normalize all the attributes to have the same scale (say transform all features to be in the range [-1,1] or [0,1])