32
1 Action Classification: An Integration of Randomization and Discrimination in A Dense Feature Representation Computer Science Department, Stanford University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford.edu Bangpeng Yao, Aditya Khosla, and Li Fei-Fei

Computer Science Department, Stanford University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

  • Upload
    pisces

  • View
    17

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Action Classification: An Integration of Randomization and Discrimination in A Dense Feature Representation. Bangpeng Yao, Aditya Khosla , and Li Fei-Fei. Computer Science Department, Stanford University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford.edu. Outline. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

1

Action Classification: An Integration of Randomization and Discrimination in A

Dense Feature Representation

Computer Science Department, Stanford University

{bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford.edu

Bangpeng Yao, Aditya Khosla, and Li Fei-Fei

Page 2: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

2

• Action Classification & Intuition

• Our Method

• Our Results

• Conclusion

Outline

Page 3: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

• Action Classification & Intuition

• Our Method

• Our Results

• Conclusion

Outline

3

Page 4: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

4

Action Classification

Object classification:

Presence of parts and their spatial configurations.[Lazebnik et al, 2006][Fergus et al, 2003]…

Phoning RidingBike Running

Page 5: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

5

Action Classification

• All images contain humans;

Object classification:

Presence of parts and their spatial configurations.[Lazebnik et al, 2006][Fergus et al, 2003]…

Page 6: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

6

Action Classification

• All images contain humans;• Objects small or absence;

Object classification:

Presence of parts and their spatial configurations.[Lazebnik et al, 2006][Fergus et al, 2003]…

Page 7: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

7

Action Classification

• All images contain humans;• Objects small or absence;• Large pose variation & occlusion;• Background clutter;

Challenging…

Object classification:

Presence of parts and their spatial configurations.[Lazebnik et al, 2006][Fergus et al, 2003]…

Page 8: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

8

Our Intuition

Focus on image regions that contain the most discriminative information.

Page 9: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

9

Our Intuition

Focus on image regions that contain the most discriminative information.

How to represent the features? Dense feature space

Randomization & DiscriminationHow to explore this feature space?

Page 10: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

Outline

10

• Action Classification & Intuition

• Our Method

• Our Results

• Conclusion

Page 11: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

11

... ... ...

......

......

Region Height

Region Width

Dense Feature Space

Normalized Image

Size of image region

Center of image region

Page 12: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

12

... ... ...

......

......

Region Height

Region Width

Normalized Image

Size of image region

Center of image region

Dense Feature Space

Page 13: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

13

... ... ...

......

......

Region Height

Region Width

Normalized Image

Size of image region

Center of image region

Dense Feature Space

Page 14: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

14

... ... ...

......

......

Region Height

Region Width

How can we identify the discriminative regions efficiently and effectively?

Normalized Image

Size of image region

Center of image region

Dense Feature Space

Image size: N×NImage regions: O(N6)

Page 15: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

15

... ... ...

......

......

Region Height

Region Width

Normalized Image

Size of image region

Center of image region

Apply randomization to sample a subset of image patches

Dense Feature Space

Random Forests (RF)

Page 16: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

16

... ... ...

......

......

Region Height

Region Width

This class Other classes

Random Forests (RF)

Normalized Image

Size of image region

Center of image region

Dense Feature Space

Page 17: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

17

... ... ...

......

......

Region Height

Region Width

RF with discriminative classifiers

Normalized Image

Size of image region

Center of image region

This class Other classes

Dense Feature Space

Page 18: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

18

Generalization Ability of RF

• Generalization error of a RF:

: correlation between decision trees: strength of the decision trees

• Discriminative classifiers

Better generalization

• Dense feature space decreases

increases

Page 19: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

19

… … … …

RF with Discriminative Classifiers

Page 20: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

20

… … … …

Train a binary SVM

RF with Discriminative Classifiers

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

1

1

0

BoW or SPM of SIFT-LLC features

Page 21: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

21

… … … …

Train a binary SVM

RF with Discriminative Classifiers

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

1

1

0Biggest information gain

Page 22: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

22

… … … …

Train a binary SVM

RF with Discriminative Classifiers

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

1

1

0

Page 23: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

23

… … … …

RF with Discriminative Classifiers

• We stop growing the tree if:- The maximum depth is reached;- There is only one class at the node;- The entropy of the training data at the node is low

Page 24: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

24

Classification With RF

… … … …

Number of treesClass Label

Page 25: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

• Action Classification & Intuition

• Our Method

• Our Results

• Conclusion

Outline

25

Page 26: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

26

Results on VOC 2011 Actions

ActionOthers’

BestOur

Method

Jumping 71.6 66.0

Phoning 50.7 41.0

Playing instrument 77.5 60.0

Reading 37.8 41.5

Riding bike 88.8 90.0

Riding horse 90.2 92.1

Running 87.9 86.6

Taking photo 25.7 28.8

Using computer 58.9 62.0

Walking 59.5 65.9

Our method ranks the first in six out of ten classes.

Page 27: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

27

Results on VOC 2011 Actions

ActionOthers’

BestOur

Method

Jumping 71.6 66.0

Phoning 50.7 41.0

Playing instrument 77.5 60.0

Reading 37.8 41.5

Riding bike 88.8 90.0

Riding horse 90.2 92.1

Running 87.9 86.6

Taking photo 25.7 28.8

Using computer 58.9 62.0

Walking 59.5 65.9

Page 28: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

28

Results on VOC 2011 Actions

ActionOthers’

BestOur

Method

Jumping 71.6 66.0

Phoning 50.7 41.0

Playing instrument 77.5 60.0

Reading 37.8 41.5

Riding bike 88.8 90.0

Riding horse 90.2 92.1

Running 87.9 86.6

Taking photo 25.7 28.8

Using computer 58.9 62.0

Walking 59.5 65.9

Page 29: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

29

Generalization Ability of RF

• Discriminative classifiers

Better generalization

• Dense feature space Tree correlation decreasesTree strength increases

0 100 200 300 4000.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Number of trees

Mea

n A

vera

ge-P

reci

sion

dense feature, weak classifierSPM feature, strong classifierdense feature, strong classifier

dense feature (spatial pyramid)SPM feature

Vs.

strong classifier weak classifierVs.

Train discriminative SVM classifiers

Generate feature weights randomly

(Results on PASCAL VOC 2010)

Page 30: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

• Action Classification & Intuition

• Our Method

• Our Results

• Conclusion

Outline

30

Page 31: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

31

Conclusion

• Exploring dense image features can benefit action classification;

• Combining randomization and discrimination is an effective way to explore the dense image representation;

• Achieves very good performance based on only one type of image descriptor;

• Code will be available soon.

Page 32: Computer  Science Department, Stanford  University {bangpeng,aditya86,feifeili}@cs.stanford

32

… … … …

Train a binary SVM

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

1

1

0

Acknowledgement

Bangpeng Yao, Aditya Khosla, and Li Fei-Fei. “Combining Randomization and Discrimination for Fine-Grained Image Categorization.” CVPR 2011.

Thanks to Su Hao, Olga Russakovsky, and Carsten Rother.

Reference: