1 / 19

Nonnegative Shared Subspace Learning and Its Application to Social Media Retrieval

Nonnegative Shared Subspace Learning and Its Application to Social Media Retrieval. Presenter: Andy Lim. Paper Topic. Folksonomy Social media s haring p latforms. The Problem. Rise in popularity of social image and video sharing platforms Precision of tag-based media retrieval Tags are

jaron
Télécharger la présentation

Nonnegative Shared Subspace Learning and Its Application to Social Media Retrieval

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Nonnegative Shared Subspace Learning and Its Application to Social Media Retrieval Presenter: Andy Lim

  2. Paper Topic • Folksonomy • Social media sharing platforms

  3. The Problem • Rise in popularity of social image and video sharing platforms • Precision of tag-based media retrieval • Tags are • Noisy • Ambiguous • Incomplete • Subjective • Lack of constraints • Free-text tags (i.e. “djfja;sldfkj”) Tags: hotdog, chinese, trololol, aidjishi, sandwich, bread

  4. Previous Research(Internal) • Improving tag relevance • Sigurbjornsson and Zwol • Developed a method of recommending a set of relevant tags based on tag popularity • Li et al. • List all images for a given tag and determine tag relevance from visual similarity • All are confined to noisy tags within the primary dataset

  5. The Approach • Internal vs. External • Leverage external auxiliary sources of information to improve target tagging systems (presumably much noisier) • Exploit disparate characteristics of target domain using auxiliary source • Note: What is the optimal level of joint modeling such that the target domain still benefits from the auxiliary source?

  6. Assumptions • There is a common underlying subspace shared by the primary and secondary domains • The primary domain is much nosier than the secondary domains

  7. Nonnegative Matrix Factorization • X (M x N data matrix) where N = documents in terms of M vocabulary words • F (M x R nonnegative matrix) represents R basis vectors • H (R x N nonnegative matrix) contains coordinates of each document

  8. Joint Shared Nonnegative Matrix Factorization (JSNMF) • Input: • X (target domain), Y (auxiliary domain), R1 and R2 (dimensionality of underlying subspaces of X and Y), K (basis vectors) • Output: • W (joint shared subspace), U (remaining subspace in target domain), V (remaining subspace in auxiliary domain), H (coordinate matrix for target domain), L (coordinate matrix for auxiliary domain)

  9. Retrieval using JSNMF • Input: W, U, H, query sentence SQ, number of images (or videos) to be retrieved N and image (or video) dataset • Output: Return top N retrieved images (or videos)

  10. Experiment • Use LabelMe tags (auxiliary) to improve • Image retrieval in Flickr • Video retrieval in Youtube • Why LabelMe? • Object image tagging • Controlled vocabulary

  11. Flickr Dataset • Downloaded 50,000 images from Flickr • Average number of distinct tags = 8 • Removed • Rare tags (appears less than 5 times) • Images with no tags and non-English tags • Obtained 20,000 labeled images • 7,000 examples are kept for investigating internal auxiliary dataset

  12. YouTube Dataset • Downloaded 18,000 videos’ metadata (tags, URL, category, title, comments, etc.) • Average number of distinct tags = 7 • Removed • Rare tags (appearing less than 2 times) • Videos with no tags or non-English tags • Obtained dataset corresponding to 12,000 videos • Again, kept 7,000 examples to be used as an internal auxiliary dataset

  13. LabelMe Dataset • Added 7,000 images with tags from LabelMe • Average number of distinct tags = 32 • Removed • Rare tags (appearing less than 2 times) • Cleanup does not reduce dataset

  14. Evaluation Measures • Defined query set Q • {cloud, man, street, water, road, leg, table, plant, girl, drawer, lamp, bed, cable, bus, pole, laptop, plate, kitchen, river, pool, flower} • Manually annotated the two datasets (Flickr and YouTube) with respect to the query set (no benchmark dataset available) • Query term and an image is relevant if the concept is clearly visible in the image (or video)

  15. Results with JSNMF • Precision-Scope Curve • Fix recall at 0.1 • Users are usually only interested in first few results • 10% improvement

  16. Results with JSNMF • Under-representation • Shares very few basis vectors • Over-representation • Forces many basis vectors to represent both datasets • Appropriate level of representation

  17. Flickr Retrieval Results • Results are better with LabelMe • As recall increases, precision decreases • When K=0 (no sharing) or K=40 (fully sharing), precision is lower compared to K=15

  18. YouTube Retrieval Results • Similar to Flickr Results

  19. Extra Notes & Questions? • Can be extended to multiple datasets (not just 2) • Can use generic model to apply to other data mining tasks

More Related