Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published bySibyl Singleton Modified over 9 years ago
1
O BJ C UT M. Pawan Kumar Philip Torr Andrew Zisserman UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
2
Aim Given an image, to segment the object Segmentation should (ideally) be shaped like the object e.g. cow-like obtained efficiently in an unsupervised manner able to handle self-occlusion Segmentation Object Category Model Cow Image Segmented Cow
3
Challenges Self Occlusion Intra-Class Shape Variability Intra-Class Appearance Variability
4
Motivation Magic Wand Current methods require user intervention Object and background seed pixels (Boykov and Jolly, ICCV 01) Bounding Box of object (Rother et al. SIGGRAPH 04) Cow Image Object Seed Pixels
5
Motivation Magic Wand Current methods require user intervention Object and background seed pixels (Boykov and Jolly, ICCV 01) Bounding Box of object (Rother et al. SIGGRAPH 04) Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels
6
Motivation Magic Wand Current methods require user intervention Object and background seed pixels (Boykov and Jolly, ICCV 01) Bounding Box of object (Rother et al. SIGGRAPH 04) Segmented Image
7
Motivation Magic Wand Current methods require user intervention Object and background seed pixels (Boykov and Jolly, ICCV 01) Bounding Box of object (Rother et al. SIGGRAPH 04) Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels
8
Motivation Magic Wand Current methods require user intervention Object and background seed pixels (Boykov and Jolly, ICCV 01) Bounding Box of object (Rother et al. SIGGRAPH 04) Segmented Image
9
Problem Manually intensive Segmentation is not guaranteed to be ‘object-like’ Non Object-like Segmentation Motivation
10
Our Method Combine object detection with segmentation –Borenstein and Ullman, ECCV ’02 –Leibe and Schiele, BMVC ’03 Incorporate global shape priors in MRF Detection provides – Object Localization – Global shape priors Automatically segments the object –Note our method completely generic –Applicable to any object category model
11
Outline Problem Formulation Form of Shape Prior Optimization Results
12
Problem Labelling m over the set of pixels D Shape prior provided by parameter Θ Energy E (m,Θ) = ∑Φ x (D|m x )+Φ x (m x |Θ) + ∑ Ψ xy (m x,m y )+ Φ(D|m x,m y ) Unary terms –Likelihood based on colour –Unary potential based on distance from Θ Pairwise terms –Prior –Contrast term Find best labelling m* = arg min ∑ w i E (m,Θ i ) –w i is the weight for sample Θ i Unary terms Pairwise terms
13
MRF Probability for a labelling consists of Likelihood Unary potential based on colour of pixel Prior which favours same labels for neighbours (pairwise potentials) Prior Ψ xy (m x,m y ) Unary Potential Φ x (D|m x ) D (pixels) m (labels) Image Plane x y mxmx mymy
14
Example Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels Prior x … y … … … x … y … … … Φ x (D|obj) Φ x (D|bkg) Ψ xy (m x,m y ) Likelihood Ratio (Colour)
15
Example Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels Prior Likelihood Ratio (Colour)
16
Contrast-Dependent MRF Probability of labelling in addition has Contrast term which favours boundaries to lie on image edges D (pixels) m (labels) Image Plane Contrast Term Φ(D|m x,m y ) x y mxmx mymy
17
Example Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels Prior + Contrast x … y … … … x … y … … … Likelihood Ratio (Colour) Ψ xy (m x,m y ) + Φ(D|m x,m y ) Φ x (D|obj) Φ x (D|bkg)
18
Example Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels Prior + Contrast Likelihood Ratio (Colour)
19
Our Model Probability of labelling in addition has Unary potential which depend on distance from Θ (shape parameter) D (pixels) m (labels) Θ (shape parameter) Image Plane Object Category Specific MRF x y mxmx mymy Unary Potential Φ x (m x |Θ)
20
Example Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels Prior + Contrast Distance from Θ Shape Prior Θ
21
Example Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels Prior + Contrast Likelihood + Distance from Θ Shape Prior Θ
22
Example Cow Image Object Seed Pixels Background Seed Pixels Prior + Contrast Likelihood + Distance from Θ Shape Prior Θ
23
Outline Problem Formulation –E (m,Θ) = ∑Φ x (D|m x )+Φ x (m x |Θ) + ∑ Ψ xy (m x,m y )+ Φ(D|m x,m y ) Form of Shape Prior Optimization Results
24
Layered Pictorial Structures (LPS) Generative model Composition of parts + spatial layout Layer 2 Layer 1 Parts in Layer 2 can occlude parts in Layer 1 Spatial Layout (Pairwise Configuration)
25
Layer 2 Layer 1 Transformations Θ 1 P(Θ 1 ) = 0.9 Cow Instance Layered Pictorial Structures (LPS)
26
Layer 2 Layer 1 Transformations Θ 2 P(Θ 2 ) = 0.8 Cow Instance Layered Pictorial Structures (LPS)
27
Layer 2 Layer 1 Transformations Θ 3 P(Θ 3 ) = 0.01 Unlikely Instance Layered Pictorial Structures (LPS)
28
LPS for Detection Learning – Learnt automatically using a set of examples Detection –Matches LPS to image using Loopy Belief Propagation –Localizes object parts
29
Outline Problem Formulation Form of Shape Prior Optimization Results
30
Optimization Given image D, find best labelling as m* = arg max p(m|D) Treat LPS parameter Θ as a latent (hidden) variable EM framework –E : sample the distribution over Θ –M : obtain the labelling m
31
E-Step Given initial labelling m ’, determine p(Θ|m ’,D) Problem Efficiently sampling from p(Θ|m ’,D) Solution We develop efficient sum-product Loopy Belief Propagation (LBP) for matching LPS. Similar to efficient max-product LBP for MAP estimate –Felzenszwalb and Huttenlocher, CVPR ‘04
32
Results Different samples localize different parts well. We cannot use only the MAP estimate of the LPS.
33
M-Step Given samples from p(Θ|m ’,D), get new labelling m new Sample Θ i provides –Object localization to learn RGB distributions of object and background –Shape prior for segmentation Problem –Maximize expected log likelihood using all samples –To efficiently obtain the new labelling
34
M-Step Cow Image Shape Θ 1 w 1 = P(Θ 1 |m’,D) RGB Histogram for Object RGB Histogram for Background
35
Cow Image Shape Θ 1 M-Step w 1 = P(Θ 1 |m’,D) Θ1Θ1 Image Plane D (pixels) m (labels) Best labelling found efficiently using a Single Graph Cut
36
Segmentation using Graph Cuts x … y ……… z …… Obj Bkg Cut Φ x (D|bkg) + Φ x (bkg|Θ) m Φ z (D|obj) + Φ z (obj|Θ) Ψ xy (m x,m y )+ Φ(D|m x,m y )
37
Segmentation using Graph Cuts x … y ……… z …… Obj Bkg m
38
M-Step Cow Image Shape Θ 2 w 2 = P(Θ 2 |m’,D) RGB Histogram for Background RGB Histogram for Object
39
M-Step Cow Image Shape Θ 2 w 2 = P(Θ 2 |m’,D) Θ2Θ2 Image Plane D (pixels) m (labels) Best labelling found efficiently using a Single Graph Cut
40
M-Step Θ2Θ2 Image Plane Θ1Θ1 w1w1 + w 2 + …. Best labelling found efficiently using a Single Graph Cut m* = arg min ∑ w i E (m,Θ i )
41
Outline Problem Formulation Form of Shape Prior Optimization Results
42
SegmentationImage Results Using LPS Model for Cow
43
In the absence of a clear boundary between object and background SegmentationImage Results Using LPS Model for Cow
44
SegmentationImage Results Using LPS Model for Cow
45
SegmentationImage Results Using LPS Model for Cow
46
SegmentationImage Results Using LPS Model for Horse
47
SegmentationImage Results Using LPS Model for Horse
48
Our MethodLeibe and SchieleImage Results
49
Appearance ShapeShape+Appearance Results Without Φ x (D|m x ) Without Φ x (m x |Θ)
50
Conclusions –New model for introducing global shape prior in MRF –Method of combining detection and segmentation –Efficient LBP for detecting articulated objects Future Work –Other shape parameters need to be explored –Method needs to be extended to handle multiple visual aspects
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.