A New Image Classification Technique using Tree-Structured Regional Features

Tommy W. S. Chow and M. K. M. Rahman

Neurocomputing

Abstract

Image Classification is a challenging problem of computer vision. Conventional image classification methods use flat image features with fixed dimensions, which are extracted from a whole image. Such features are computationally effective but are crude representation of the image content. This paper proposes a new image classification approach through a tree-structured feature set. In this approach, the image content is organized in a two-level tree, where the root node at the top level represents the whole image and the child nodes at the bottom level represent the homogeneous regions of the image. The tree-structured representation combines both the global and the local features through the root and the child nodes. The tree-structured feature data are then processed by a two-level self-organizing map (SOM), which consists of an unsupervised SOM for processing image regions and a supervising Concurrent SOM (CSOM) classifier for the overall classification of images. The proposed method incorporates both global image features and local region-based features to improve the performance of image classification. Experimental results show that this approach performs better than conventional approaches.

 

Method Description:

After image segmentation, the image is decomposed into a number of homogeneous regions. In Fig. 1, it shows that the image is represented by a two-level tree, where the root node represents the whole image and child nodes represent the region-based objects. The root node is assigned to the global feature, which is the color histogram in this case. Local region-based features, such as color moment, texture, size and shape, are assigned to the child nodes. This enables global and local image features to be integrated through a tree structure.

 

Traditional neural-network-based classifiers only deal with fixed-vector type input data. To solve this problem, we use the SOM’s property of dimensionality reduction for dealing with tree-structured data. The child nodes’ (regions) features are first processed by a SOM to reduce the dimension of the final input vector. Thus, special arrangement of a two-layer SOM network is used to process the tree. The bottom layer consists of a SOM network to process the child nodes, while the top layer that consists of a CSOM classifier processes the root nodes. Fig. 2 demonstrates the processing of tree-structured data. To start the training process, the bottom SOM layer is first trained by the child node inputs from all tree data. After the completion of training, each child node is associated with its best-matched neuron on the SOM. Positions of these neurons are then used for inputs encoding of the root node together with the features of the root nodes. The root nodes, the final identity of the images, are then processed with the CSOM classifier. Thus, the bottom layer SOM is used for region encoding, while the top layer CSOM is used for image classification task.

 

In the experiment, we have compared results with traditional sets of flat image features extracted over the whole image. In addition, we compared our proposed approach with the purely region-based approach in which the same tree-structure of our method is used without assigning global features to root node. Different feature combinations were investigated for using as region features in our approach. Table 1 summarizes only the best performing feature sets in our experiments.

Table 1: Lists of the features sets used in the experiments. The features used for each set shown on the right side.

Flat Feature Sets

Features

FF1

Color moments+Gabor texture

FF2

Binary histogram+Gabor texture

FF3

Color histogram+Gabor texture

Region Feature Sets

Features

RF1

Color moments+Gabor texture+shape+size

RF2

Color moments+Haar wavelet+shape+size

RF3

Color histogram+Gabor texture+shape+size

Tree-structured Feature Sets

Features

Global Features

Region Features

TS1

Color Histogram

Color moments+Gabor texture+shape+size

TS2

Color Histogram

Color moments+Haar wavelet+shape+size

TS3

Color Histogram

Color histogram+Gabor texture+shape+size

TS4

Color Histogram

Color histogram+Haar wavelet+shape+size

TS5

Color Histogram

Color moments +Color histogram+Gabor texture+Haar wavelet+shape+size

To evaluate the proposed approach, an image database consisting of 1000 images was used in this study. The images were categorized into 10 classes, each containing 100 images. Fig. 3 and Table 2 summarizes some comparative results from different approaches.

Table 2: Classification performances achieved by different feature sets.

Classification Performance (in percentage) on Testing Set

Image Classes

Average

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Flat Feature Sets

FF1

69

62

66

56

84

100

70

88

76

32

56

FF2

70

64

64

60

98

98

58

98

84

22

56

FF3

68

64

60

60

84

98

70

86

70

30

54

Region Feature Sets

RF1

51

42

14

6

80

54

56

96

74

8

76

RF2

63

56

46

40

86

92

60

84

62

34

70

RF3

56

46

4

34

62

64

56

86

98

22

88

Tree-structured Feature Sets

TS1

80

80

64

54

82

100

82

96

100

48

92

TS2

81

80

50

72

92

100

82

94

98

48

90

TS3

78

76

36

64

78

100

86

90

100

52

94

TS4

78

74

52

66

84

100

86

84

100

48

88

TS5

80

78

52

60

86

100

80

90

100

60

92

Source Code : imgClassi_Code.zip