Skip to main content

A Comparison of Generic Machine Learning Algorithms for Image Classification

  • Conference paper
Research and Development in Intelligent Systems XX (SGAI 2003)

Abstract

In this paper, we evaluate 7 machine learning algorithms for image classification including our recent approach that combines building of ensembles of extremely randomized trees and extraction of sub-windows from the original images. For the approach to be generic, all these methods are applied directly on pixel values without any feature extraction. We compared them on four publicly available datasets corresponding to representative applications of image classification problems: handwritten digits (MNIST), faces (ORL), 3D objects (COIL-IOO), and textures (OUTEX). A comparison with studies from the computer vision literature shows that generic methods can come remarkably close to specialized methods. In particular, our sub-window algorithm is competitive with the state of the art, a remarkable result considering its generality and conceptual simplicity.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. L. Breiman. Bagging predictors. Machine Learning, 24(2):123–140, 1996.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. L. Breiman. Random forests. Machine learning, 45:5–32, 2001.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. L. Breiman, J.H. Friedman, R.A. Olsen, and C.J. Stone. Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth International (California), 1984.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. C.J.C. Burges and B. Schölkopf, Improving the accuracy and speed of support vector machines. In M. C. Mozer, M. I. Jordan, and Thomas Petsche, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 9, page 375. The MIT Press, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chih-Chung Chang and Chih-Jen Lin. Libsvm: a library for support vector machines. Technical report, Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Taiwan University, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Dahmen, D. Keysers, and H. Ney. Combined classification of handwritten digits using the ‘virtual test sample method’. In Proc. Second International Workshop, MCS 2001 Cambridge, UK, pages 99–108, July 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. Drucker. Fast decision tree ensembles for optical character recognition. In Proc. Fifth Annual Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval, pages 137–147, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Y. Freund and R. E. Schapire. Experiments with a new boosting algorithm. In Proc. Thirteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 148–156, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  9. P. Geurts. Contributions to decision tree induction: bias/variance tradeoff and time series classification. Phd. thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Liège, May 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. P. Geurts. Extremely randomized trees. Technical report, Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Liège, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  11. G.-D. Guo, S. Li, and K. Chan. Face recognition by support vector machines. In Proc. International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition, 196–201., 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  12. G.-D. Guo and H.-J. Zhang. Boosting for fast face recognition. In Proc. IEEE ICCV Workshop on Recognition, Analysis, and Tracking of Faces and Gestures in Real-Time Systems, pages 96–100, 200l.

    Google Scholar 

  13. M.S. Hoque and M. C. Fairhurst. A moving window classifier for offline character recognition. In Proc. of the Seventh International Workshop on Frontiers in Handwriting Recognition, Amsterdam, pages 595–600, September 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  14. T.O. Kvalseth. Entropy and correlation: Some comments. IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, SMC-17(3):517–519, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. S. Lawrence, C. Lee Giles, A. C. Tsoi, and A. D. Back. Face recognition: A convolutional neural network approach. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 8(1):98–113, 1997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Y. LeCun, L. Bottou, Y. Bengio, and P. Haffner. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc. of the IEEE, 86(11):2278–2324, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. R. Maree, Geurts P., Piater J., and Wehenkel L. A generic approach for image classification based on decision tree ensembles. Submitted.

    Google Scholar 

  18. T. Menp, M. Pietikinen, and J. Viertola. Separating color and pattern information for color texture discrimination. In Proc. 16th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  19. A. Nefian and M. Hayes. Face recognition using an embedded HMM. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Audio and Video-based Biometric Person Authentication, pages 19–24, March 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  20. S. Obrzalek and J. Matas. Object recognition using local affine frames on distinguished regions. In Electronic Proceedings of the 13th British Machine Vision Conference, University of Cardiff, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  21. T. Ojala, T. Menp, M. Pietikinen, J. Viertola, J. Kyllnen, and S. Huovinen. Outex-new framework for empirical evaluation of texture analysis algorithms. Proc. 16th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Quebec, Canada, 1:701–706, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  22. R. Paredes and A. Perez-Cortes. Local representations and a direct voting scheme for face recognition. In Pattern Recognition in Information Systems, Proc. 1st International Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Information Systems, pages 71–79, July 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  23. M. Pontil and A. Verri. Support vector machines for 3d object recognition. IEEE 1hmsactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 20(6):637–646, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. V.N. Vapnik. The nature of statistical learning theory. Springer Verlag, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  25. L. Wehenkel. Automatic learning techniques in power systems. Kluwer Academic, Boston, 1998.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag London

About this paper

Cite this paper

Marée, R., Geurts, P., Visimberga, G., Piater, J., Wehenkel, L. (2004). A Comparison of Generic Machine Learning Algorithms for Image Classification. In: Coenen, F., Preece, A., Macintosh, A. (eds) Research and Development in Intelligent Systems XX. SGAI 2003. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-412-8_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-412-8_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-780-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-85729-412-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy