mcg ict cas trecvid 2008 automatic video 2008 automatic
play

MCG-ICT-CAS TRECVID 2008 Automatic Video 2008 Automatic Video - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

MCG-ICT-CAS TRECVID 2008 Automatic Video 2008 Automatic Video Retrieval System Retrieval System Juan Cao, Yong-dong Zhang, , g g g, Bai-lan Feng, Xiu-feng Hua, Lei Bao, Xu Zhang INSTITUT INS TE O E OF CO Multimedia Computing Group


  1. MCG-ICT-CAS TRECVID 2008 Automatic Video 2008 Automatic Video Retrieval System Retrieval System Juan Cao, Yong-dong Zhang, , g g g, Bai-lan Feng, Xiu-feng Hua, Lei Bao, Xu Zhang INSTITUT INS TE O E OF CO Multimedia Computing Group COMPUTIN Institute of Computing Technology MPUTING Chinese Academy of Sciences G TE TECHN CHNOLOGY NIST TRECVID Workshop November 17,2008

  2. Outline INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Overall system � Review of baseline retrieval Review of baseline retrieval � Performance analysis � Concept-based retrieval � Re-ranking � Dynamic fusion � Conclusion � Conclusion

  3. INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY System Overview

  4. Review of baseline retrieval R i f b li t i l INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Text-based retrieval 0.009 � ASR shot matching g A window of 3 shots � Pre-processing � Pre processing Stop words removing stemming � Indexing � Indexing lucence

  5. Review of baseline retrieval R i f b li t i l INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY 0.009 � Text-based retrieval � Visual-based retrieval 0.033 � Feature extraction EH CM Sift EH CM Sift-visual-keywords i l k d Early fusion and LDA embedding � Retrieval model � Retrieval model Multi-bag SVM cosine-similarity � Fusion SSC dynamic fusion

  6. Review of baseline retrieval R i f b li t i l INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Text-based retrieval 0.009 � Visual-based retrieval � Visual based retrieval 0.033 0 033 � HLF-based retrieval 0.029 � Concept detectors C d CU-VIREO374 � � Retrieval Model R t i l M d l Multi-bag svm � [Acknowledgement]: Thank Dr. Yu-Gang Jiang for great help in the experiments. p p

  7. Review of baseline retrieval R i f b li t i l INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Text-based retrieval 0.009 � Visual-based retrieval � Visual based retrieval 0.033 0 033 � HLF-based retrieval 0.029 � Concept-based retrieval 0.044 p � Keywords mapping � DBCS mapping � DBCS mapping

  8. Review of baseline retrieval Review of baseline retrieval INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Text-based retrieval 0.009 0 009 � Visual-based retrieval 0.033 � HLF-based retrieval 0.029 24% � Concept-based retrieval 0.044 � Re-ranking 0.036 � Face � Face � motion

  9. R Review of baseline retrieval i f b li t i l INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Text-based retrieval 0.009 � Visual-based retrieval 0.033 � HLF-based retrieval 0.029 � Concept-based retrieval 0.044 � Re-ranking 0.036 � SSC Dynamic fusion � SSC Dynamic fusion

  10. Query-to-concept mapping Q t t i INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY Semantic similarity retrieve the Data: most similar most similar query(textual description,visual examples) Related work concepts Aim: Max{similarity( query, concept)} Statistic similarity Statistic similarity reduce the d th most Data: Collection(ASR text, concept distribution) co-occurrence concepts Aim: Max {p(query , concept)}

  11. Query-to-concept mapping Q t t i INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY Semantic similarity retrieve the Data: most similar most similar query(textual description,visual examples) Correct useful Related work concepts to describe the query to identify the query Aim: Max{similarity( query, concept)} Statistic similarity Statistic similarity reduce the d th most Data: Collection(ASR text, concept distribution) co-occurrence concepts Aim: Max {p(query , concept)}

  12. Wh t i What is useful ? f l ? INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Discriminability-ranking � The distributions fluctuate widely between � The distributions fluctuate widely between the given category and the others, but remain stable within this one. i t bl ithi thi � Factors � Factors � Difference of the concept distribution � Detector performance � Collection characteristic � Collection characteristic

  13. Distribution Based Concept Distribution Based Concept Selection Framework(DBCS) INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY VAC: the difference between categories 2 2 ← − − ∑ ∑ VAC t VAC t c ( , ( ) ) sign F t c i ( ( F t ( ( , ) ) F t F t c ( ( , ))( ))( F t F t c ( ( , ) ) F t F t c ( ( , )) )) i i j i j ≠ j i VIC: the difference within the given category g g y 1 ∑ ← − 2 V IC ( , t c ) ( F ( , t s ) F ( , t c )) i i n ∈ s c i i Discriminability-score = Score t ( ) ( ) VAC t c ( , ( , ) / ) VIC t c ( , ( , ) ) i i i i � Where F(t,s) is the distribution function of concept ( , ) p t in shot s .

  14. Example-1 Discriminability-similarity consistency INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Topic248 Find shots of a crowd of people � Topic248 Find shots of a crowd of people , outdoors , outdoors filling more than half of the frame area DBCS approach DBCS approach Text selection approach Text selection approach infAP=0.321 infAP=0.203 Crowd Crowd Crowd Crowd 1 40 1.40 Outdoors People_Marching 0.92 Person Demonstration_Or_ 0.64 Protest Factor 1: outdoors and Factor-1: outdoors and Protesters Protesters 0.55 0 55 person also frequently Dark- 0.52 occur in other case. skinned People skinned_People Factor-3: collection characteristic

  15. Example-2 Discriminability-similarity inconsistency Di i i bilit i il it i i t INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Topic261 Find shots of one or more people at a � Topic261 Find shots of one or more people at a table or desk , with a computer visible Text selection approach T t l ti h DBCS approach infAP=0.012 infAP=0.116 Computer 0.55 Attached_Body_Parts Computer_Or_Television_Sc Classroom 0.30 reens reens Medical_Personnel 0.27 person Body Parts Body_Parts 0 25 0.25 Hand 0.23 Factor 2: computer d t detector is not reliable t i t li bl

  16. Re-ranking INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � face and motion factors f f � shot-level average face size and position � shot-leve principal motion direction and intensity ′ = ′ + × Score S S Score F FactorScore t S F FactorCoefficient t C ffi i t � Shot-level vs. Keyframe-level Extract the stable factor � Re-ranking selection R d Reduce the negative effect th ti ff t

  17. Dynamic fusion INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Smoothed Similarity Cluster(SSC) S S C (SSC) A feature undergoes a rapid change in its normalized scores is � likely to perform better than a feature which undergoes a more likely to perform better than a feature which undergoes a more gradual transition. 1 1 1000 ( 1000 ( − + ∑ score n ( ) ( ) score n ( ( 1)) )) = n 1 [ P. Wilkins,2007] 1000 = SC 1 N − + ∑ ( score n ( ) score n ( 1)) = n 1 N N median SC ( ) = SSC SC is unstable in real noisy data. y standard deviation SC t d d d i ti ( ( SC ) ) = ∑ In our system, all fusion Run SSC Score Run Weight Run Weight processes are realized by SSC All SSC Scores method.

  18. Outline INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Overall System � Review of baseline retrieval Review of baseline retrieval � Performance analysis � Concept-based retrieval � Re-ranking � Dynamic fusion � conclusion � conclusion

  19. Overview of submitted and unsubmitted runs b itt d INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY Run Description Run Description Mean InfAP Mean InfAP Run 1: Text baseline 0.009 Run2 * : Visual baseline(Multi-bag SVM) Run2 : Visual baseline(Multi bag SVM) 0.024 0.024 Run3 * : Visual baseline(LDA) 0.028 Run4: SSC(Run2, Run3) 0.033 * is the Run 5: HLF baseline(svm, CU-VIREO374) 0.029 unsubmiited run 0.036 Run 6: HLF baseline +re-ranking Run 7 * : Concept retrieval(text map, CU-VIREO374) 0.026 Run 8 * : Concept retrieval(DBCS map, CU-VIREO374) 0.039 Run 9 * : SSC(Run7 + Run8) 0.043 Run 10: SSC(Run5 + Run9) 0.053 Run 11: SSC(Run4 + Run9) 0.067

  20. Overall performance analysis INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY 0.08 0.07 0.07 Fusion of visual and concept-based runs 0.06 Best concept-based run 0.05 0.04 Best visual-based run 0.03 0.02 Our text-based run Our text-based run 0.01 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 A t Automatic search runs of TRECVID2008 ti h f TRECVID2008

  21. Conclusion-1 INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Concept-based retrieval is a promising direction. direction. � DBCS mapping method can achieve a DBCS i th d hi stable good performance. � The difference of the concept distribution is more useful than the distribution itself . � Select concepts independent of the detector performance is not reasonable.

  22. Conclusion-2 INSTITUTE OF COMPUTING TECHNOLOGY � Face and motion based re-ranking Face and motion based re ranking technology is important for some special t topics. i � Shot-level feature is stable � Reducing the negative effect is important

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend