ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Online feature selection for pixel classification
Full text PdfPdf (905 KB)
Source ACM International Conference Proceeding Series; Vol. 119 archive
Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Machine learning table of contents
Bonn, Germany
Pages: 249 - 256  
Year of Publication: 2005
ISBN:1-59593-180-5
Authors
Karen Glocer  University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA
Damian Eads  Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM
James Theiler  Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 5,   Downloads (12 Months): 18,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1102351.1102383
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Online feature selection (OFS) provides an efficient way to sort through a large space of features, particularly in a scenario where the feature space is large and features take a significant amount of memory to store. Image processing operators, and especially combinations of image processing operators, provide a rich space of potential features for use in machine learning for image processing tasks but they are expensive to generate and store. In this paper we apply OFS to the problem of edge detection in grayscale imagery. We use a standard data set and compare our results to those obtained with traditional edge detectors, as well as with results obtained more recently using "statistical edge detection." We compare several different OFS approaches, including hill climbing, best first search, and grafting.


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
Forbes, L. A., & Draper, B. A. (2000). Inconsistencies in edge detector evaluation. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 398--404). Hilton Head, SC.
 
3
Forrest, S., & Mitchell, M. (1993). Relative building-block fitness and the building-block hypothesis. In L. D. Whitley (Ed.), Foundations of Genetic Algorithms 2, 109--126. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
 
4
Green, D., & Swets, J. (1966). Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
 
5
Greenspan, II., Belongie, S., Perona, P., Goodman, R., Rakshit, S., & Anderson, C. (1994). Overcomplete steerable pyramid filters and rotation invariance. CVPR94 (pp. 222--228).
 
6
 
7
Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2001). The Elements of Statistical Learning. New York: Springer.
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
Nestares, O., Navarro, R., Portilla, J., & Tabernero, A. (1998). Efficient spatial-domain implementation of a multiscale image representation based on Gabor functions. Journal of Electronic Imaging, 7, 166--173.
 
13
 
14
Perkins, S., & Theiler, J. (2003). Online feature selection using grafting. ICML (pp. 592--599).
 
15
Shin, M. C., Goldgof, D. B., & Bowyer, K. W. (1999). Comparison of edge detectors using an object recognition task. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 360--365).
 
16
 
17
Zhu (1996). Efficient evaluations of edge connectivity and width uniformity. Image and Vision Computing, 14, 21--34.

Collaborative Colleagues:
Karen Glocer: colleagues
Damian Eads: colleagues
James Theiler: colleagues