| Who | When |
Messages | |
|
|
|
Dave Bradley
|
1
|
 |
|
01-22-2006 09:25 PM ET (US)
|
|
please post you thoughts on "Learning to Detect Natural Image Boundaries Using Local Brightness, Color, and Texture Cues"
|
| Stefan Zickler
|
2
|
 |
|
01-25-2006 01:19 AM ET (US)
|
|
The goal of creating a pure low level boundary detector that should label regions in the same way as a human would is ambitious. Humans probably make use of some top-down knowledge when marking boundaries on pictures, so I am not sure if a gradient based approach like this one will ever achieve human-like results. It would be interesting to see a comparison of their algorithm against human-labeled images of e.g. totally abstract art (which the human has never been exposed to and which does not carry any recognizable meaning in it). I believe that such a comparison will have a significantly smaller gap between human and machine since the human can't take as much advantage of his inherent knowledge of what constitutes an object.
|
| Carlos Vallespi
|
3
|
 |
|
01-25-2006 10:10 AM ET (US)
|
|
The ground truth can be biased by humans inference. That is, humans are able to detect real world objects and ignore existing contourns that are not relevant. I do not know how the classifier learns that by using low level features. I guess it is confused sometimes and this may degrade its performance. I am not sure about abstract art either. Maybe using synthetic images coming from a 3D modeller in which both, humans and computers, know where the contourns are could be a solution to this.
|
| |
Messages 4-5 deleted by topic administrator between 07-22-2006 10:24 AM and 07-21-2006 09:03 AM |