skip to main content
10.1145/1631272.1631285acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Descriptive visual words and visual phrases for image applications

Published: 19 October 2009 Publication History

Abstract

The Bag-of-visual Words (BoW) image representation has been applied for various problems in the fields of multimedia and computer vision. The basic idea is to represent images as visual documents composed of repeatable and distinctive visual elements, which are comparable to the words in texts. However, massive experiments show that the commonly used visual words are not as expressive as the text words, which is not desirable because it hinders their effectiveness in various applications. In this paper, Descriptive Visual Words (DVWs) and Descriptive Visual Phrases (DVPs) are proposed as the visual correspondences to text words and phrases, where visual phrases refer to the frequently co-occurring visual word pairs. Since images are the carriers of visual objects and scenes, novel descriptive visual element set can be composed by the visual words and their combinations which are effective in representing certain visual objects or scenes. Based on this idea, a general framework is proposed for generating DVWs and DVPs from classic visual words for various applications. In a large-scale image database containing 1506 object and scene categories, the visual words and visual word pairs descriptive to certain scenes or objects are identified as the DVWs and DVPs. Experiments show that the DVWs and DVPs are compact and descriptive, thus are more comparable with the text words than the classic visual words. We apply the identified DVWs and DVPs in several applications including image retrieval, image re-ranking, and object recognition. The DVW and DVP combination outperforms the classic visual words by 19.5% and 80% in image retrieval and object recognition tasks, respectively. The DVW and DVP based image re-ranking algorithm: DWPRank outperforms the state-of-the-art VisualRank by 12.4% in accuracy and about 11 times faster in efficiency.

References

[1]
S. Battiato, G. M. Farinella, G. Gallo, and D. Ravi. Spatial hierarchy of textons distribution for scene classification. Proc. Eurocom Multimedia Modeling, pp. 333--342, 2009.
[2]
S. Brin and L. Page. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. International World-Wide Web Conference, pp. 107--117, 1998.
[3]
J. Deng, W. Dong, R. Socher, L.-J. Li, K. Li, and L. Fei-Fei. ImageNet: a large-scale hierarchical image database. Proc. CVPR, pp. 710--719, 2009.
[4]
C. Fellbaum. Wordnet: an electronic lexical database. Bradford Books, 1998.
[5]
B. J. Frey and D. Dueck. Clustering by passing messages between data points. Science, 16(315): 972--976, Jan. 2007.
[6]
A. Gionis, P. Indyk, and R. Motwani. Similarity search in high dimensions via hashing. Proc. VLDB, pp. 518--529, 1999.
[7]
W. H. Hsu, L. S. Kennedy, and S. F. Chang. Video search reranking through random walk over document-level context graph. Proc. ACM Multimedia, pp. 971--980, 2007.
[8]
Y. Jing and S. Baluja. VisualRank: applying PageRank to large-scale image search. PAMI, 30(11): 1877--1890, Nov. 2008.
[9]
F. Jurie and B. Triggs. Creating efficient codebooks for visual recognition. Proc. ICCV, pp. 17--21, 2005.
[10]
S. Lazebnik and M. Raginsky. Supervised learning of quantizer codebook by information loss minimization. PAMI, 31(7): 1294--1309, July 2009.
[11]
S. Lazebnik, C. Schmid, and J. Ponce. Beyond bags of features: spatial pyramid matching for recognizing natural scene categories. Proc. CVPR, pp. 2169--2178, 2006.
[12]
D. Liu, G. Hua, P. Viola, and T. Chen. Integrated feature selection and higher-order spatial feature extraction for object categorization. Proc. CVPR, pp. 1--8, 2008.
[13]
J. Liu, W. Lai, X. Hua, Y. Huang, and S. Li. Video search re-ranking via multi-graph propagation. ACM Multimedia, pp. 208--217, 2007.
[14]
D. G. Lowe. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. IJCV, 60(2): 91--110, Nov. 2004.
[15]
M. Marszalek and C. Schmid. Spatial weighting for bag-of-features. Proc. CVPR, pp. 2118--2125, 2006.
[16]
F. Moosmann, E. Nowak, and F. Jurie. Randomized clustering forests for image classification. PAMI, 30(9): 1632--1646, Sep. 2008.
[17]
D. Nister and H. Stewenius. Scalable recognition with a vocabulary tree. Proc. CVPR, pp. 2161--2168, 2006.
[18]
F. Perronnin and C. Dance. Fisher kernels on visual vocabulary for image categorization. Proc. CVPR, pp. 1--8, 2007.
[19]
F. Perronnin. Universal and adapted vocabularies for generic visual categorization. PAMI, 30(7): 1243--1256, July 2008.
[20]
S. Savarese, J. Winn, and A. Criminisi. Discriminative object class models of appearance and shape by correlatons. Proc. CVPR, pp. 2033--2040, 2006.
[21]
Z. Si, H. Gong, Y. N. Wu, and S. C. Zhu. Learning mixed templates for object recognition. Proc. CVPR, 2009.
[22]
J. Sivic and A. Zisserman. Video Google: a text retrieval approach to object matching in videos. Proc. ICCV, pp. 1470--1477, 2003.
[23]
X. Tian, L. Yang, J. Wang, Y. Yang, X. Wu, and X. Hua. Bayesian video search reranking. Proc. ACM Multimedia, pp. 131--140, 2008.
[24]
A. Torralba, R. Fergus, and W. T. Freeman. 80 million tiny images: a large dataset for non-parametric object and scene recognition. PAMI, 30(11): 1958--1970, Nov. 2008.
[25]
P. Viola and M. Jones. Robust real-time face detection. Proc. ICCV, pp. 7--14, 2001.
[26]
C. Wang, D. Blei, and L. Fei-Fei. Simultaneous image classification and annotation. Proc. CVPR, 2009.
[27]
F. Wang, Y. G. Jiang, and C. W. Ngo. Video event detection using motion relativity and visual relatedness. Proc. ACM Multimedia, pp. 239--248, 2008.
[28]
J. Winn, A. Criminisi, and T. Minka. Object categorization by learning universal visual dictionary. Proc. ICCV, pp. 17--21, 2005.
[29]
Z. Wu, Q. F. Ke, and J. Sun. Bundling features for large-scale partial-duplicate web image search. Proc. CVPR, 2009.
[30]
D. Xu and S. F. Chang. Video event recognition using kernel methods with multilevel temporal alignment. PAMI, 30(11): 1985--1997, Nov. 2008.
[31]
L. Yang, P. Meer, and D. J. Foran. Multiple class segmentation using a unified framework over mean-shift patches. Proc. CVPR, pp. 1--8, 2007.
[32]
J. Yuan, Y. Wu, and M. Yang. Discovery of collocation patterns: from visual words to visual phrases. Proc. CVPR, pp.1--8, 2007.
[33]
Y. T. Zheng, M. Zhao, S. Y. Neo, T. S. Chua, and Q. Tian. Visual synset: a higher-level visual representation. CVPR, pp. 1--8, 2008.
[34]
X. Zhou, X. D. Zhuang, S. C. Yan, S. F. Chang, M.H. Johnson, and T.S. Huang. SIFT-bag kernel for video event analysis. Proc. ACM Multimedia, pp. 229--238, 2008.

Cited By

View all

Index Terms

  1. Descriptive visual words and visual phrases for image applications

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    MM '09: Proceedings of the 17th ACM international conference on Multimedia
    October 2009
    1202 pages
    ISBN:9781605586083
    DOI:10.1145/1631272
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 19 October 2009

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. bag-of-visual words
    2. image re-ranking
    3. object recognition

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Conference

    MM09
    Sponsor:
    MM09: ACM Multimedia Conference
    October 19 - 24, 2009
    Beijing, China

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 2,145 of 8,556 submissions, 25%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)14
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
    Reflects downloads up to 12 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media