On the sampling of web images for learning visual concept classifiers

ABSTRACT

Visual concept learning often requires a large set of training images. In practice, nevertheless, acquiring noise-free training labels with sufficient positive examples is always expensive. A plausible solution for training data collection is by sampling the largely available user-tagged images from social media websites. With the general belief that the probability of correct tagging is higher than that of incorrect tagging, such a solution often sounds feasible, though is not without challenges. First, user-tags can be subjective and, to certain extent, are ambiguous. For instance, an image tagged with "whales" may be simply a picture about ocean museum. Learning concept "whales" with such training samples will not be effective. Second, user-tags can be overly abbreviated. For instance, an image about concept "wedding" may be tagged with "love" or simply the couple's names. As a result, crawling sufficient positive training examples is difficult. This paper empirically studies the impact of exploiting the tagged images towards concept learning, investigating the issue of how the quality of pseudo training images affects concept detection performance. In addition, we propose a simple approach, named semantic field, for predicting the relevance between a target concept and the tag list associated with the images. Specifically, the relevance is determined through concept-tag co-occurrence by exploring external sources such as WordNet and Wikipedia. The proposed approach is shown to be effective in selecting pseudo training examples, exhibiting better performance in concept learning than other approaches such as those based on keyword sampling and tag voting.

References

1. M. Ames and M. Naaman. Why we tag: Motivations for annotation in mobile and online media. In ACM SIGCHI, 2007.
2. A. Ulges et al. Learning automatic concept detectors from online video. Comput. Vis. Image Understand, 2009.
3. D. Liu et al. Tag ranking. In ACM WWW, 2009.
4. G.-J. Qi et al. Transductive inference with hierarchical clustering for video annotation. In ICME, 2007.
5. J. Tang et al. Inferring semantic concepts from community-contributed images and noisy tags. In ACM MM, 2009.
6. K. Bischoff et al. Can all tags be used for search. In ACM CIKM, 2008.
7. Q. Tian et al. A new analysis of the value of unlabeled data in semi-supervised learning for image retrieval. In ICME, 2004.
8. S.-F. Chang et al. Columbia University/VIREO-CityU/IRIT TRECVID 2008 high-level feature extraction and interactive video search. In TRECVID, 2008.
9. T.-S. Chua et al. NUS-WIDE: A real-world web image database from national university of singapore. In CIVR, 2009.
10. Y.-G. Jiang et al. Representations of keypoint-based semantic concept detection: A comprehensive study. IEEE Trans. on Multimedia, 12(1):42--53, 2010.
11. Y.-G. Jiang, C.-W Ngo, and J. Yang. Towards optimal bag-of-features for object categorization and semantic video retrieval. In CIVR, 2007.
12. D. Jurafsky and J. H. Martin. Speech and language processing. Prentice-Hall, 2000.
13. L. S. Kennedy, S.-F. Chang, and I. V. Kozintsev. To search or to label. In ACM MIR, 2006.
14. L.-J. Li and L. Fei-Fei. OPTIMOL: automatic object picture collection via incremental model learning. Int. J. of Computer Vision, 2009.
15. X.-R. Li and C. G. M. Snoek. Visual categorization with negative examples for free. In ACM MM, 2009.
16. X.-R. Li, C. G. M. Snoek, and M. Worring. Learning social tag relevance by neighbor voting. IEEE Trans. on MM, 11(7):1310--1322, 2009.
17. M. R. Naphade and J. R. Smith. On the detection of semantic concepts at TRECVID. In ACM MM, 2004.
18. G. Quénot and S. Ayache. TRECVID 2009 collaborative annotation. http://mrim.imag.fr/tvca/.
19. F. Schroff, A. Criminisi, and A. Zisserman. Harvesting image databases from the web. In ICCV, 2007.
20. A. T. Setz and C. G. M. Snoek. Can social tagged images aid concept-based video search. In ICME, 2009.
21. S. Tong and E. Chang. Support vector machine active learning for image retrieval. In ACM MM, 2001.
22. G. Wang, T.-S. Chua, and M. Zhao. Exploring knowledge of sub-domain in a multi-resoluation bootstrapping framework for concept detection in news. In ACM MM, 2008.
23. R. Yan, A. G. Hauptmann, and R. Jin. Negative pseudo-relevance feedback in content-based video retrieval. In ACM MM, 2003.
24. R. Yan and M. R. Naphade. Semi-supervised cross feature learning for semantic concept detection in video. In CVPR, 2005.

Index Terms

• Information systems

  • Information retrieval

    • Document representation