Model Selection in Summary Evaluation

A difficulty in the design of automated text summarization algorithms is in the objective evaluation. Viewing summarization as a tradeoff between length and information content, we introduce a technique based on a hierarchy of classifiers to rank, through model selection, different summarization methods. This summary evaluation technique allows for broader comparison of summarization methods than the traditional techniques of summary evaluation. We present an empirical study of two simple, albeit widely used, summarization methods that shows the different usages of this automated task-based evaluation system and confirms the results obtained with human-based evaluation methods over smaller corpora.

Object Detection in Images by Components

In this paper we present a component based person detection system that is capable of detecting frontal, rear and near side views of people, and partially occluded persons in cluttered scenes. The framework that is described here for people is easily applied to other objects as well. The motivation for developing a component based approach is two fold: first, to enhance the performance of person detection systems on frontal and rear views of people and second, to develop a framework that directly addresses the problem of detecting people who are partially occluded or whose body parts blend in with the background. The data classification is handled by several support vector machine classifiers arranged in two layers. This architecture is known as Adaptive Combination of Classifiers (ACC). The system performs very well and is capable of detecting people even when all components of a person are not found. The performance of the system is significantly better than a full body person detector designed along similar lines. This suggests that the improved performance is due to the components based approach and the ACC data classification structure.

A Note on the Generalization Performance of Kernel Classifiers with Margin

We present distribution independent bounds on the generalization misclassification performance of a family of kernel classifiers with margin. Support Vector Machine classifiers (SVM) stem out of this class of machines. The bounds are derived through computations of the $V_gamma$ dimension of a family of loss functions where the SVM one belongs to. Bounds that use functions of margin distributions (i.e. functions of the slack variables of SVM) are derived.

Some Extensions of the K-Means Algorithm for Image Segmentation and Pattern Classification

In this paper we present some extensions to the k-means algorithm for vector quantization that permit its efficient use in image segmentation and pattern classification tasks. It is shown that by introducing state variables that correspond to certain statistics of the dynamic behavior of the algorithm, it is possible to find the representative centers fo the lower dimensional maniforlds that define the boundaries between classes, for clouds of multi-dimensional, mult-class data; this permits one, for example, to find class boundaries directly from sparse data (e.g., in image segmentation tasks) or to efficiently place centers for pattern classification (e.g., with local Gaussian classifiers). The same state variables can be used to define algorithms for determining adaptively the optimal number of centers for clouds of data with space-varying density. Some examples of the applicatin of these extensions are also given.

Comparing Support Vector Machines with Gaussian Kernels to Radial Basis Function Classifiers

The Support Vector (SV) machine is a novel type of learning machine, based on statistical learning theory, which contains polynomial classifiers, neural networks, and radial basis function (RBF) networks as special cases. In the RBF case, the SV algorithm automatically determines centers, weights and threshold such as to minimize an upper bound on the expected test error. The present study is devoted to an experimental comparison of these machines with a classical approach, where the centers are determined by $k$--means clustering and the weights are found using error backpropagation. We consider three machines, namely a classical RBF machine, an SV machine with Gaussian kernel, and a hybrid system with the centers determined by the SV method and the weights trained by error backpropagation. Our results show that on the US postal service database of handwritten digits, the SV machine achieves the highest test accuracy, followed by the hybrid approach. The SV approach is thus not only theoretically well--founded, but also superior in a practical application.

Multiclass Classification of SRBCTs

A novel approach to multiclass tumor classification using Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) was introduced in a recent paper cite{Khan2001}. The method successfully classified and diagnosed small, round blue cell tumors (SRBCTs) of childhood into four distinct categories, neuroblastoma (NB), rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and the Ewing family of tumors (EWS), using cDNA gene expression profiles of samples that included both tumor biopsy material and cell lines. We report that using an approach similar to the one reported by Yeang et al cite{Yeang2001}, i.e. multiclass classification by combining outputs of binary classifiers, we achieved equal accuracy with much fewer features. We report the performances of 3 binary classifiers (k-nearest neighbors (kNN), weighted-voting (WV), and support vector machines (SVM)) with 3 feature selection techniques (Golub's Signal to Noise (SN) ratios cite{Golub99}, Fisher scores (FSc) and Mukherjee's SVM feature selection (SVMFS))cite{Sayan98}.

Component based recognition of objects in an office environment

We present a component-based approach for recognizing objects under large pose changes. From a set of training images of a given object we extract a large number of components which are clustered based on the similarity of their image features and their locations within the object image. The cluster centers build an initial set of component templates from which we select a subset for the final recognizer. In experiments we evaluate different sizes and types of components and three standard techniques for component selection. The component classifiers are finally compared to global classifiers on a database of four objects.