Scribd
Upload
46 views37 pages

Computer Examples: Tenenbaum, de Silva, Langford "A Global Geometric Framework For Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction"

This document discusses using nonlinear dimensionality reduction techniques like Isomap and locally linear embedding (LLE) to analyze a database of 698 face images. It finds that Isomap computes the manifold representation faster than LLE and allows for meaningful traversal through the manifold by varying a parameter to include nearby points. However, both techniques perform poorly on images that differ only by uniform translation due to their sensitivity to pixel differences. Increasing the number of neighbors considered improves Isomap's ability to handle translation but risks overestimating the manifold structure.

Uploaded by

sushilnayak
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
46 views37 pages

Computer Examples: Tenenbaum, de Silva, Langford "A Global Geometric Framework For Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction"

This document discusses using nonlinear dimensionality reduction techniques like Isomap and locally linear embedding (LLE) to analyze a database of 698 face images. It finds that Isomap computes the manifold representation faster than LLE and allows for meaningful traversal through the manifold by varying a parameter to include nearby points. However, both techniques perform poorly on images that differ only by uniform translation due to their sensitivity to pixel differences. Increasing the number of neighbors considered improves Isomap's ability to handle translation but risks overestimating the manifold structure.

Uploaded by

sushilnayak
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 37

Computer examples

Tenenbaum, de Silva, Langford


“A Global Geometric Framework for
Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction”
Statue face database
• 698 64x64 grayscale images
• 2 mins, 12 secs on a ~600 (?) MHz PIII
The computed manifold
The computed manifold
Testing the sensibility of the
manifold coordinates
One test you could do:
1. Sort all faces according to first manifold
coordinate (“left-right”)
2. View them in order
3. See if the face makes a monotonic progression
from left to right
Right  Left
Up  Down
Cleaner,
since light
variation is
strictly
azimuthal
(consistent
chin shadow)
Lit on left  Lit on right
Testing the sensibility of the
manifold coordinates
Semantic consistency of a dimension value
deteriorates between points that are far away
on the manifold.
4 consecutive frames from right  left movie:

Well-lit faces are turning to


the left with respect to each
other

Dimly-lit faces also don’t


turn right w.r.t each other
Testing the sensibility of the
manifold coordinates
Semantic consistency of a dimension value
deteriorates between points that are far away
on the manifold.

Explanations:
Geodesic distance on the manifold is
approximated by shortest-path distance in a
neighbor graph.
 Sparsity in neighbor graphs result in
distance error for points far away on the
graph.
Testing the sensibility of the
manifold coordinates
Geodesic distance approximator can’t be perfect in the
face of sparse data
Testing the sensibility of the
manifold coordinates
The test expected this face:
Testing the sensibility of the
manifold coordinates
…to be a bit more left-facing than this face:
Traversing the manifold
• Collapsing the manifold to one dimension
isn’t the way to use it.
• Try tracing one dimension while keeping
the other dimensions from jumping around
too much.
Traversing the manifold
• Algorithm used:
• Sort images by “left-right” coord as before
• Draw a smooth line through the manifold
• Only add images that are within a certain
manifold distance D from this line.
Traversing the manifold
Traversing the manifold
Traversing the manifold
Traversing the manifold

D = 20
(Half the range of the “up-down” dimension)
Traversing the manifold

(D = 30)
Traversing the manifold

D = 40 (using 80% of the faces)


Traversing the manifold

D = 50 (using 98% of the faces)


Comparison to LLE
Run both algorithms on 100 of the statue faces
(64 x 64 pixels)
Isomap LLE
Comparison to LLE
Running time for 100 64x64 images:
LLE: 5 secs
Isomap: 1.39 secs
Comparison to LLE
The collapsing-to-primary-dimension-test:
Comparison to LLE
Uh… the collapsing-to-second-dimension-test
Comparison to LLE
The horizontal manifold traversal test (7 frames)
Comparison to LLE
• LLE: once manifold is computed,
meaningful paths through it need to be
searched for.
Weakness under translation
• Images with a common background and a
single translating object will have a rough
time with pixel differences.
Weakness under translation
• Uniform translation, no overlap

Input images:

Output images:
Weakness under translation
• Uniform translation, 1-column overlap

Input images:

Output images:
Weakness under translation
• Uniform translation, 1-column overlap
Weakness under translation
• Uniform translation, with a skip
Weakness under translation
• Isomap with k = 1 (like before)

(Original)

(Reconstruction)
Weakness under translation
• Isomap with k = 2

(Original)

(Reconstruction)
Overestimating k
• Isomap with k = 2
End

You might also like