4 resultados para Planar vector field
em Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Resumo:
In order to recognize an object in an image, we must determine the best transformation from object model to the image. In this paper, we show that for features from coplanar surfaces which undergo linear transformations in space, there exist projections invariant to the surface motions up to rotations in the image field. To use this property, we propose a new alignment approach to object recognition based on centroid alignment of corresponding feature groups. This method uses only a single pair of 2D model and data. Experimental results show the robustness of the proposed method against perturbations of feature positions.
Resumo:
Integration of inputs by cortical neurons provides the basis for the complex information processing performed in the cerebral cortex. Here, we propose a new analytic framework for understanding integration within cortical neuronal receptive fields. Based on the synaptic organization of cortex, we argue that neuronal integration is a systems--level process better studied in terms of local cortical circuitry than at the level of single neurons, and we present a method for constructing self-contained modules which capture (nonlinear) local circuit interactions. In this framework, receptive field elements naturally have dual (rather than the traditional unitary influence since they drive both excitatory and inhibitory cortical neurons. This vector-based analysis, in contrast to scalarsapproaches, greatly simplifies integration by permitting linear summation of inputs from both "classical" and "extraclassical" receptive field regions. We illustrate this by explaining two complex visual cortical phenomena, which are incompatible with scalar notions of neuronal integration.
Resumo:
We derive a new representation for a function as a linear combination of local correlation kernels at optimal sparse locations and discuss its relation to PCA, regularization, sparsity principles and Support Vector Machines. We first review previous results for the approximation of a function from discrete data (Girosi, 1998) in the context of Vapnik"s feature space and dual representation (Vapnik, 1995). We apply them to show 1) that a standard regularization functional with a stabilizer defined in terms of the correlation function induces a regression function in the span of the feature space of classical Principal Components and 2) that there exist a dual representations of the regression function in terms of a regularization network with a kernel equal to a generalized correlation function. We then describe the main observation of the paper: the dual representation in terms of the correlation function can be sparsified using the Support Vector Machines (Vapnik, 1982) technique and this operation is equivalent to sparsify a large dictionary of basis functions adapted to the task, using a variation of Basis Pursuit De-Noising (Chen, Donoho and Saunders, 1995; see also related work by Donahue and Geiger, 1994; Olshausen and Field, 1995; Lewicki and Sejnowski, 1998). In addition to extending the close relations between regularization, Support Vector Machines and sparsity, our work also illuminates and formalizes the LFA concept of Penev and Atick (1996). We discuss the relation between our results, which are about regression, and the different problem of pattern classification.
Resumo:
In the first part of this paper we show a similarity between the principle of Structural Risk Minimization Principle (SRM) (Vapnik, 1982) and the idea of Sparse Approximation, as defined in (Chen, Donoho and Saunders, 1995) and Olshausen and Field (1996). Then we focus on two specific (approximate) implementations of SRM and Sparse Approximation, which have been used to solve the problem of function approximation. For SRM we consider the Support Vector Machine technique proposed by V. Vapnik and his team at AT&T Bell Labs, and for Sparse Approximation we consider a modification of the Basis Pursuit De-Noising algorithm proposed by Chen, Donoho and Saunders (1995). We show that, under certain conditions, these two techniques are equivalent: they give the same solution and they require the solution of the same quadratic programming problem.