| Literature DB >> 29693590 |
Oscar García-Olalla1, Enrique Alegre2,3, Laura Fernández-Robles4,5, Eduardo Fidalgo6,7, Surajit Saikia8,9.
Abstract
Textile based image retrieval for indoor environments can be used to retrieve images that contain the same textile, which may indicate that scenes are related. This makes up a useful approach for law enforcement agencies who want to find evidence based on matching between textiles. In this paper, we propose a novel pipeline that allows searching and retrieving textiles that appear in pictures of real scenes. Our approach is based on first obtaining regions containing textiles by using MSER on high pass filtered images of the RGB, HSV and Hue channels of the original photo. To describe the textile regions, we demonstrated that the combination of HOG and HCLOSIB is the best option for our proposal when using the correlation distance to match the query textile patch with the candidate regions. Furthermore, we introduce a new dataset, TextilTube, which comprises a total of 1913 textile regions labelled within 67 classes. We yielded 84.94% of success in the 40 nearest coincidences and 37.44% of precision taking into account just the first coincidence, which outperforms the current deep learning methods evaluated. Experimental results show that this pipeline can be used to set up an effective textile based image retrieval system in indoor environments.Entities:
Keywords: content-based image retrieval; textile localization; textile retrieval; texture description; texture retrieval; visual sensors
Year: 2018 PMID: 29693590 PMCID: PMC5982789 DOI: 10.3390/s18051329
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Scheme of the textile based image retrieval system.
Figure 2A region sample of each of the 67 classes in TexilTube dataset. The number underneath indicates the amount of regions that belong to that class.
Figure 3In rows, images that contain the same textile class in TextilTube dataset. The yellow rectangles overlaid in the images indicate the bounding boxes of the textile regions of the ground truth.
Figure 4Scheme of the voting procedure to determine the best distance measure.
Figure 5Results of the voting process in parts per unity for the different distance measures.
Figure 6Precision at n (p@n) for all texture descriptors using Correlation distance and .
Precision at n (p@n) for all texture descriptors using Correlation distance and . Results highlighted in bold mark the best results per cut of the hit list.
| Descriptor |
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| HOG + HCLOSIB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| HOG + CLOSIB | 35.9 | 30.8 | 27.9 | 25.4 | 23.8 | 22.5 | 20.8 | 19.5 | 18.5 | 17.7 |
| HOG | 35.2 | 30.0 | 26.7 | 24.4 | 22.8 | 21.5 | 20.2 | 19.4 | 18.7 | 17.8 |
| Faster R-CNN | 30.1 | 27.4 | 25.2 | 23.8 | 22.5 | 21.6 | 20.6 | 19.7 | 19.0 | 18.2 |
| ALBP | 28.9 | 25.2 | 23.0 | 21.4 | 20.1 | 19.0 | 18.1 | 17.5 | 16.9 | 16.3 |
| ALBP + HCLOSIB | 25.5 | 21.7 | 19.6 | 18.7 | 17.9 | 17.0 | 16.2 | 15.8 | 15.4 | 15.0 |
| ALBP + CLOSIB | 24.8 | 23.1 | 21.8 | 20.4 | 19.5 | 18.8 | 18.1 | 17.5 | 17.1 | 16.6 |
| LBP | 16.6 | 14.8 | 14.2 | 13.7 | 13.3 | 13.3 | 13.0 | 12.6 | 12.3 | 12.0 |
| LBP + CLOSIB | 12.2 | 10.8 | 10.4 | 9.6 | 9.2 | 8.9 | 8.5 | 8.3 | 8.1 | 7.9 |
| LBP + HCLOSIB | 11.1 | 10.1 | 9.3 | 8.7 | 8.6 | 8.5 | 8.4 | 8.1 | 8.0 | 7.7 |
|
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| HOG + HCLOSIB |
| 17.0 | 16.4 | 15.8 | 15.3 | 15.0 | 14.6 | 14.4 | 14.0 | 13.7 |
| HOG + CLOSIB | 17.1 | 16.4 | 15.8 | 15.4 | 14.9 | 14.6 | 14.2 | 13.9 | 13.6 | 13.3 |
| HOG | 17.0 | 16.4 | 15.9 | 15.5 | 14.9 | 14.5 | 14.1 | 13.7 | 13.4 | 13.0 |
| Faster R-CNN | 17.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ALBP | 15.9 | 15.6 | 15.2 | 15.0 | 14.7 | 14.4 | 14.2 | 14.0 | 13.8 | 13.5 |
| ALBP + HCLOSIB | 14.7 | 14.4 | 14.1 | 14.0 | 13.7 | 13.5 | 13.3 | 13.1 | 13.0 | 12.8 |
| ALBP + CLOSIB | 16.2 | 15.7 | 15.4 | 15.1 | 14.8 | 14.6 | 14.4 | 14.2 | 14.0 | 13.9 |
| LBP | 11.7 | 11.4 | 11.3 | 11.1 | 11.0 | 10.8 | 10.7 | 10.5 | 10.5 | 10.4 |
| LBP + CLOSIB | 7.9 | 7.8 | 7.7 | 7.6 | 7.6 | 7.5 | 7.4 | 7.4 | 7.3 | 7.2 |
| LBP + HCLOSIB | 7.7 | 7.7 | 7.6 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 7.3 | 7.3 | 7.2 | 7.2 | 7.2 |
Figure 7Success at n (s@n) for all texture descriptors using Correlation distance and .
Success at n (p@n) for all texture descriptors using Correlation distance and . Results highlighted in bold mark the best results per cut of the hit list.
| Descriptor |
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| Faster R-CNN | 30.1 | 38.7 | 44.3 | 48.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ALBP | 28.9 | 37.0 | 42.3 | 46.7 | 49.5 | 51.9 | 54.4 | 56.8 | 58.2 | 60.0 |
| LBP | 16.6 | 22.6 | 27.6 | 31.7 | 35.5 | 40.5 | 42.8 | 45.2 | 47.5 | 49.2 |
| ALBP + HCLOSIB | 25.5 | 31.4 | 36.5 | 40.6 | 44.0 | 47.1 | 48.8 | 51.0 | 53.0 | 54.7 |
| HOG + HCLOSIB |
|
|
|
|
| 54.6 | 56.1 | 57.1 | 58.4 | 60.1 |
| HOG + CLOSIB | 35.9 | 40.6 | 44.0 | 46.6 | 49.8 | 52.5 | 53.2 | 54.8 | 56.4 | 57.9 |
| HOG | 35.2 | 39.5 | 42.4 | 44.1 | 46.1 | 48.9 | 50.9 | 52.9 | 54.9 | 56.1 |
| ALBP + CLOSIB | 24.8 | 31.7 | 36.7 | 39.8 | 42.7 | 49.0 | 46.6 | 48.3 | 49.8 | 50.5 |
| LBP + HCLOSIB | 10.4 | 14.7 | 17.4 | 21.1 | 24.4 | 27.1 | 29.0 | 31.1 | 33.4 | 34.9 |
| LBP + CLOSIB | 12.2 | 16.5 | 20.0 | 22.0 | 24.1 | 26.9 | 28.7 | 29.9 | 31.3 | 32.6 |
|
|
| |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Faster R-CNN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ALBP | 61.5 | 63.0 | 64.3 | 65.8 | 66.5 | 67.8 | 68.7 | 69.6 | 70.2 | 71.5 |
| LBP | 50.9 | 53.0 | 54.5 | 55.8 | 57.6 | 59.4 | 60.2 | 61.0 | 62.4 | 63.5 |
| ALBP + HCLOSIB | 56.6 | 57.9 | 59.2 | 60.8 | 61.9 | 62.6 | 63.1 | 64.2 | 64.5 | 64.9 |
| HOG + HCLOSIB | 60.8 | 61.7 | 62.3 | 63.3 | 64.5 | 65.0 | 65.6 | 66.5 | 66.8 | 67.3 |
| HOG + CLOSIB | 59.5 | 60.2 | 60.4 | 61.2 | 62.0 | 62.6 | 62.9 | 63.2 | 63.7 | 64.3 |
| HOG | 56.8 | 57.5 | 57.7 | 58.6 | 59.1 | 59.9 | 60.3 | 61.0 | 61.4 | 61.6 |
| ALBP + CLOSIB | 51.2 | 52.5 | 53.3 | 53.7 | 54.2 | 55.6 | 56.6 | 57.4 | 58.1 | 58.8 |
| LBP + HCLOSIB | 36.5 | 38.5 | 39.7 | 41.7 | 42.9 | 43.9 | 45.1 | 46.6 | 48.1 | 48.7 |
| LBP + CLOSIB | 34.2 | 36.1 | 37.2 | 38.9 | 40.4 | 41.8 | 42.1 | 42.7 | 43.2 | 43.7 |
Figure 8Arithmetic mean of precision and success at n for intervals of n from 1 to 10, from 1 to 20 and from 1 to 40.
Arithmetic mean of precision and success at n for intervals of n from 1 to 10, from 1 to 20 and from 1 to 40. Results highlighted in bold mark the best results per performance metric.
| Descriptor | Precision | Success | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (1–10) | Mean (1–20) | Mean (1–40) | Mean (1–10) | Mean (1–20) | Mean (1–40) | |
| HOG + HCLOSIB |
|
| 15.1 |
| 57.3 | 63.9 |
| HOG + CLOSIB | 23.7 | 18.8 | 14.7 | 48.7 | 54.9 | 61.4 |
| HOG | 23.1 | 18.5 | 14.3 | 46.6 | 52.6 | 59.4 |
| Faster R-CNN | 22.5 | 18.8 |
| 50.3 |
|
|
| ALBP | 20.3 | 17.2 | 14.5 | 47.5 | 56.4 | 66.1 |
| ALBP + HCLOSIB | 18.1 | 15.7 | 13.5 | 42.2 | 50.9 | 60.1 |
| ALBP + CLOSIB | 19.6 | 17.0 | 14.6 | 40.7 | 47.3 | 55.1 |
| LBP | 13.5 | 12.2 | 10.8 | 34.1 | 44.4 | 56.1 |
| LBP + CLOSIB | 9.3 | 8.4 | 7.5 | 23.4 | 30.6 | 39.0 |
| LBP + HCLOSIB | 8.8 | 8.1 | 7.4 | 22.8 | 31.3 | 42.0 |
Figure 9First five retrieved images in the hit list for three query samples using HOG + HCLOSIB.
Figure 10First five retrieved images in the hit list for three query samples using Faster R-CNN.