Skip to main content

Performance Comparison of Different Similarity Models for CBIR with Relevance Feedback

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2728))

Abstract

This paper reports on experimental results obtained from a comparative study of retrieval performance in content-based image retrieval. Two different learning techniques, k-Nearest Neighbours and support vector machines, both of which can be used to define the similarity between two images, are compared against the vector space model. For each technique, we determine both absolute retrieval performance as well as the relative increase in performance that can be achieved through relevance feedback.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Y Chen, X Zhou, and T S Huang. One-class SVM for learning in image retrieval. In Proc IEEE Image processing 2001, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  2. I J Cox, M L Miller, T P Minka, T V Papathomas, and P N Yianilos. The Bayesian image retrieval system, pichunter. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 9(1):20–38, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. B V Dasarathy, editor. Nearest Neigbour (NN) Norms: NN Pattern Classification Techniques. IEEE Computer Society Press, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  4. D Heesch and S Rüger. Performance boosting with three mouse clicks — relevance feedback for CBIR. In Proceedings of the European Colloquium on IR Research 2003. LNCS, Springer, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T S Huang. Incorporating support vector machines in content-based image retrieval with relevance feedback. In Proc IEEE Image processing 2000, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  6. B S Manjunath and J-R Ohm. Color and texture descriptors. IEEE Transactions on circuits and systems for video technology, 11:703–715, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. C Meilhac and C Nastar. Relevance feedback and category search in image databases. In Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Multimedia Comp. and Syst., pages 512–517, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  8. T M Mitchell. Machine Learning. McGraw Hill, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  9. H Müller, S Marchand-Maillet, and T Pun. The truth about Corel-evaluation in image retrieval. In Proceedings of CIVR, pages 38–49, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. H Müller, W Müller, D M Squire, M.S Marchand-Maillet, and T Pun. Strategies for positive and negative relevance feedback in image retrieval. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR 2000), IEEE, Barcelona, Spain, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  11. M Pickering and S Rüger. Evaluation of key-frame based retrieval techniques for video. submitted to Elsevier Science and accepted for publication, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Y Rui and T S Huang. A novel relevance feedback technique in image retrieval. In ACM Multimedia (2), pages 67–70, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  13. G Salton and M J Gill. Introduction to Modern Information Retrieval. McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  14. B Schölkopf, J C Platt, J T Shawe, A J Smola, and R C Williamson. Estimation the support of a high-dimensional distribution. Technical Report MSR-TR-99-87, Microsoft Research, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  15. V N Vapnik. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. Springer Verlag, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. E M Voorhees and D Harman. Overview of the eigth Text REtrieval Conference (TREC-8). In Proc. TREC, pages 1–33 and A.17–A.18, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Heesch, D., Yavlinsky, A., Rüger, S. (2003). Performance Comparison of Different Similarity Models for CBIR with Relevance Feedback. In: Bakker, E.M., Lew, M.S., Huang, T.S., Sebe, N., Zhou, X.S. (eds) Image and Video Retrieval. CIVR 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2728. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45113-7_45

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45113-7_45

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40634-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45113-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics