ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Canonical image selection from the web
Full text PdfPdf (3.67 MB)
Source Conference On Image And Video Retrieval archive
Proceedings of the 6th ACM international conference on Image and video retrieval table of contents
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Pages: 280 - 287  
Year of Publication: 2007
ISBN:978-1-59593-733-9
Authors
Yushi Jing  Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA and Google Inc., Mountain View, CA
Shumeet Baluja  Google Inc., Mountain View, CA
Henry Rowley  Google Inc., Mountain View, CA
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 3,   Downloads (12 Months): 96,   Citation Count: 2
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1282280.1282324
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

The vast majority of the features used in today's commercially deployed image search systems employ techniques that are largely indistinguishable from text-document search - the images returned in response to a query are based on the text of the web pages from which they are linked. Unfortunately, depending on the query type, the quality of this approach can be inconsistent. Several recent studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of using image features to refine search results. However, it is not clear whether (or how much) image-based approach can generalize to larger samples of web queries. Also, the previously used global features often only capture a small part of the image information, which in many cases does not correspond to the distinctive characteristics of the category. This paper explores the use of local features in the concrete task of finding the single canonical images for a collection of commonly searched-for products. Through large-scale user testing, the canonical images found by using only local image features significantly outperformed the top results from Yahoo, Microsoft and Google, highlighting the importance of having these image features as an integral part of future image search engines.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
 
2
 
3
R. Fergus, P. Perona, and A. Zisserman. A visual category filter for google images. In Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Computer Vision, Prague, Czech Republic, pages 242--256, May 2004.
 
4
 
5
C. Harris and M. Stephens. A Combined Corner and Edge Detector. In PRoc. 4th ALVEY Vision Conference, pages 147--151, 1988.
 
6
R. Jain. Infoscopes, multimedia information systems. Multimedia Systems and Techniques, 1996.
 
7
S. Lazebnik, C. Schmid, and J. Ponce. A sparse texture representation using affine-invariant regions. In Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2003., pages 319--324, 2003.
 
8
T. Liu, A. W. Moore, A. Gray, and K. Yang. An investigation of practical approximate nearest neighbor algorithms. In Proc. 17th Conference on Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), pages 825--832, Cambridge, MA, 2005. MIT Press.
 
9
 
10
 
11
G. Park, Y. Baek, and H. Lee. Majority based ranking approach in web image retrieval. pages 111--120, 2003.
 
12
Y. Rui, T. Huang, and S. Chang. Image retrieval: current techniques, promising directions and open issues. Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 10(4):39--62, Apr. 1999.
 
13


Collaborative Colleagues:
Yushi Jing: colleagues
Shumeet Baluja: colleagues
Henry Rowley: colleagues