Action Disambiguation Analysis Using Normalized Google-Like Distance Correlogram
- 2 Citations
- 3.1k Downloads
Abstract
Classifying realistic human actions in video remains challenging for existing intro-variability and inter-ambiguity in action classes. Recently, Spatial-Temporal Interest Point (STIP) based local features have shown great promise in complex action analysis. However, these methods have the limitation that they typically focus on Bag-of-Words (BoW) algorithm, which can hardly discriminate actions’ ambiguity due to ignoring of spatial-temporal occurrence relations of visual words. In this paper, we propose a new model to capture this contextual relationship in terms of pairwise features’ co-occurrence. Normalized Google-Like Distance (NGLD) is proposed to numerically measuring this co-occurrence, due to its effectiveness in semantic correlation analysis. All pairwise distances compose a NGLD correlogram and its normalized form is incorporated into the final action representation. It is proved a much richer descriptor by observably reducing action ambiguity in experiments, conducted on WEIZMANN dataset and the more challenging UCF sports. Results also demonstrate the proposed model is more effective and robust than BoW on different setups.
Keywords
Local Feature Visual Word Action Recognition Semantic Distance Human Action RecognitionPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Yilmaz, A., Shah, M.: Actions Sketch: A Novel Action Representation. In: CVPR, pp. 984–989 (2005)Google Scholar
- 2.Efros, A.A., Berg, A.C., Mori, G., Malik, J.: Recognizing Action at a Distance. In: ICCV, pp. 726–733 (2003)Google Scholar
- 3.Blank, M., Gorelick, L., Shechtman, E., Irani, M., Basri, R.: Actions as Space-Time Shapes. In: ICCV, pp. 1395–1402 (2005)Google Scholar
- 4.Bregonzio, M., Gong, S.G., Xiang, T.: Recognising Action as Clouds of Space-Time Interest Points. In: CVPR, pp. 1948–1955 (2009)Google Scholar
- 5.Schuldt, C., Laptev, I., Caputo, B.: Recognizing human actions: a local SVM approach. In: ICPR, pp. 32–36 (2004)Google Scholar
- 6.Dollár, P., Rabaud, V., Cottrell, G., Belongie, S.: Behavior recognition via sparse spatio-temporal features. In: VS-PETS, pp. 65–72 (2005)Google Scholar
- 7.Scovanner, P., Ali, S., Shah, M.: A 3-Dimensional SIFT Descriptor and its Application to Action Recognition. In: ACM Conf. Multimedia, pp. 357–360 (2007)Google Scholar
- 8.Niebles, J.C., Wang, H.C., Fei-Fei, L.: Unsupervised Learning of Human Action Categories Using Spatial-Temporal Words. IJCV 79, 299–318 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Kläser, A., Marszalek, M., Schmid, C.: A spatio-temporal descriptor based on 3d-gradients. In: BMVC, pp. 995–1004 (2008)Google Scholar
- 10.Felzenszwalb, P.F., Girshick, R.B., McAllester, D., Ramanan, D.: Object Detection with Discriminatively Trained Part Based Models. PAMI 32, 1627–1645 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Wang, H., Ullah, M., Klaser, A., Laptev, I., Schmid, C.: Evaluation of local spatio-temporal features for action recognition. In: BMVC, pp. 124.1–124.11 (2009)Google Scholar
- 12.Cilibrasi, R.L., Vitanyi, P.M.: The google similarity distance. IEEE Transctions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 19(3), 370–383 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Savarese, S., DelPozo, A., Niebles, J.C., Fei-Fei, L.: Spatial-Temporal correlatons for unsupervised action classification. In: WMVC, pp. 1–8 (2008)Google Scholar
- 14.Kovashka, A., Grauman, K.: Learning a Hierarchy of Discriminative Space-Time Neighborhood Features for Human Action Recognition. In: CVPR, pp. 2046–2053 (2010)Google Scholar
- 15.Banerjee, P., Nevatia, R.: Learning Neighborhood Co-occurrence Statistics of Sparse Features for Human Activity Recognition. In: AVSS, pp. 212–217 (2011)Google Scholar
- 16.Rodriguez, M.D., Ahmed, J., Mubarak, S.: Action MACH: A Spatio-temporal Maximum Average Correlation Height Filter for Action Recognition. In: CVPR, pp. 1–8 (2008)Google Scholar
- 17.Danielsson, O., Carlsson, S., Sullivan, J.: Automatic learning and extraction of multi-local features. In: ICCV, pp. 917–924 (2009)Google Scholar
- 18.Liu, D., Hua, G., Viola, P., Chen, T.: Integrated feature selection and higherorder spatial feature extraction for object categorization. In: CVPR, pp. 1–8 (2008)Google Scholar
- 19.Yeffet, L., Wolf, L.: Local trinary patterns for human action recognition. In: ICCV, pp. 492–497 (2009)Google Scholar
- 20.Haralick, R.M.: Statistical and structural approaches to texture. Proceedings of the IEEE 67(5), 786–804 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Savarese, S., Winn, J., Criminisi, A.: Discriminative object class models of appearance and shape by correlatons. In: CVPR, pp. 2033–2040 (2006)Google Scholar
- 22.Sapp, B., Chaudhry, R., Yu, X., Singh, G., Perera, I., Ferraro, F., Tzoukermann, E., Kosecka, J., Neumann, J.: Recognizing Manipulation Actions in Arts and Crafts Shows using Domain-Specific Visual and Textual Cues. In: ICCV Workshops, pp. 1554–1561 (2011)Google Scholar
- 23.Edelman, S.: Representation and recognition in vision. MIT Press (1999)Google Scholar