Combining reconstruction and discrimination with class-specific sparse coding

Neural Computation

Volumn 19, Issue 7, 2007, Pages 1897-1918

  Hasler, Stephan ^a   Wersing, Heiko ^a   Körner, Edgar ^a  

^a HONDA RESEARCH INSTITUTE EUROPE GMBH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; HUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY;

DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION;

EID: 34447275723     PISSN: 08997667     EISSN: 1530888X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/neco.2007.19.7.1897     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Duda, R. O., Hart, P. E., & Stork, D. G. (2000). Pattern classification (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
2. Eggert, J., Wersing, H., & Körner, E. (2004). Transformation-invariant representation and NMF. In Proc. IEEE International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (pp. 2535-2539). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
3. Grimes, D. B., & Rao, R. P. N. (2005). Bilinear sparse coding for invariant vision. Neural Computation 17(1), 47-73.
4. Hoyer, P. (2002). Non-negative sparse coding. In Proc. IEEE Workshop on Neural Networks for Signal Processing (pp. 557-565). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
5. Hoyer, P. (2004). Non-negative matrix factorization with sparseness constraints. Journal of Machine. Learning Research, 5, 1457-1469.
6. Kwak, N., & Choi, C.-H. (2002). Input feature selection by mutual information based on parzen window. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 24(12), 1667-1671.
7. Lee, D. D., & Seung, H. S. (1999). Learning the parts of objects by non-negative matrix factorization. Nature, 401, 788-791.
8. Logothetis, N. K., & Sheinberg, D. L. (1996). Visual object recognition. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 19, 577-621.
9. McLachlan, G., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite mixture models. New York: Wiley.
10. Nayar, S. K., Nene, S. A., & Murase, H. (1996). Real-time 100 object recognition system. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Robotics and Automation, (Vol. 3 (pp. 2321-2325). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
11. Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2002). On discriminative vs. generative classifiers: A comparison of logistic regression and naive Bayes. In T. G. Dietterich, S. Becker, & Z. Ghahramani (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems, 14. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Olshausen, B. A., & Field, D. J. (1996). Emergence of simple-cell receptive field properties by learning a sparse code for natural images. Nature, 381, 607-609.
13. Raina, R., Shen, Y., Ng, A. Y., & McCallum, A. (2003). Classification with hybrid generative/discriminative models. In S. Becker, S. Thrun, & K. Obermayer (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems, 15. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Talukder, A. & Casasent, D. (1998). Classification and pose estimation of objects using nonlinear features. In Proc. SPIE Applications and Science of Computational Intelligence (Vol. 3390, pp. 12-23). Bellingham, WA: SPIE.
15. Turk, M., & Pentland, A. (1991). Eigenfaces for recognition, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 3(1), 71-86.
16. Ullman, S., & Bart, E. (2004). Recognition invariance obtained by extended and invariant features. Neural Networks, 17(1), 833-848.
17. Ulusoy, I., & Bishop, C. M. (2005). Generative versus discriminative methods for object recognition. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (pp. 258-265). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.
18. Wersing, H., & Körner, E. (2003). Learning optimized features for hierarchical models of invariant object recognition. Neural Computation, 15(7), 1559-1588.