# HG changeset patch # User Robert McIntyre # Date 1365661199 0 # Node ID 80cd096682b22dab63022f3b6e22a79f5c1bc9a0 # Parent 057d47fc4789ded634147d8ba06379a23e19c466 reviewing ullman's stuff. diff -r 057d47fc4789 -r 80cd096682b2 org/literature-review.org --- a/org/literature-review.org Thu Apr 11 05:40:23 2013 +0000 +++ b/org/literature-review.org Thu Apr 11 06:19:59 2013 +0000 @@ -208,6 +208,8 @@ cross-validation = train the model on two different sets to prevent overfitting. +nifty, relevant, realistic ideas +He doesn't confine himself to unplasaubile assumptions @@ -239,15 +241,20 @@ better with few training points, and the more complex ones do better with many training points. + The final model had intermediate complexity between published + extremes. + The more complex models must be able to be initialized efficiently from the less complex models which they replace! ** Non Parametric Models -*** Visual features of intermediate complexity and their use in classification +*** 2002 Visual features of intermediate complexity and their use in classification -*** The chains model for detecting parts by their context + + +*** 2010 The chains model for detecting parts by their context Like the constelation method for rigid objects, but extended to non-rigid objects as well. @@ -257,4 +264,60 @@ ambiguous in an image, but if you are expecting them at the end of an arm, then they become easier to find. - \ No newline at end of file + They make chains by using spatial proximity of features. That way, + a hand can be idntified by chaining back from the head. If there + is a good chain to the head, then it is more likely that there is + a hand than if there isn't. Since there is some give in the + proximity detection, the system can accomodate new poses that it + has never seen before. + + Does not use any motion information. + +*** 2005 A Hierarchical Non-Parametric Method for Capturing Non-Rigid Deformations + + (relative dynamic programming [RDP]) + + Goal is to match images, as in SIFT, but this time the images can + be subject to non rigid transformations. They do this by finding + small patches that look the same, then building up bigger + patches. They get a tree of patches that describes each image, and + find the edit distance between each tree. Editing operations + involve a coherent shift of features, so they can accomodate local + shifts of patches in any direction. They get some cool results + over just straight correlation. Basically, they made an image + comparor that is resistant to multiple independent deformations. + + !important small regions are treated the same as nonimportant + small regions + + !no conception of shape + + quote: + The dynamic programming procedure looks for an optimal + transformation that aligns the patches of both images. This + transformation is not a global transformation, but a composition + of many local transformations of sub-patches at various sizes, + performed one on top of the other. + +*** 2006 Satellite Features for the Classification of Visually Similar Classes + + Finds features that can distinguish subclasses of a class, by + first finding a rigid set of anghor features that are common to + both subclasses, then finding distinguishing features relative to + those subfeatures. They keep things rigid because the satellite + features don't have much information in and of themselves, and are + only informative relative to other features. + +*** 2005 Learning a novel class from a single example by cross-generalization. + + Let's you use a vast visual experience to generate a classifier + for a novel class by generating synthetic examples by replaceing + features from the single example with features from similiar + classes. + + quote: feature F is likely to be useful for class C if a similar + feature F proved effective for a similar class C in the past. + + Allows you to trasfer the "gestalt" of a similiar class to a new + class, by adapting all the features of the learned class that have + correspondance to the new class. \ No newline at end of file