ACM SIGGRAPH 2007 Courses 2007
DOI: 10.1145/1281500.1281528
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hierarchical parsing and recognition of hand-sketched diagrams

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
39
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Then, random noise and affine distortions were applied to these 15 flow chart symbol classes to generate a total of 3000 symbols. The 3000 flow chart symbols were divided into training and testing sets of 1000 and 2000 symbols, respectively, For the testing data set, the average classification accuracy of VizDraw is found to be 98.7%, while the classification accuracy of SimuSketch [15] is found to be 94% when these symbols were used. Further the performance of VizDraw is compared with SVM-HMM hybrid approach [17] and traditional HMM approach on a limited data set consisting of five flowchart symbols.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Then, random noise and affine distortions were applied to these 15 flow chart symbol classes to generate a total of 3000 symbols. The 3000 flow chart symbols were divided into training and testing sets of 1000 and 2000 symbols, respectively, For the testing data set, the average classification accuracy of VizDraw is found to be 98.7%, while the classification accuracy of SimuSketch [15] is found to be 94% when these symbols were used. Further the performance of VizDraw is compared with SVM-HMM hybrid approach [17] and traditional HMM approach on a limited data set consisting of five flowchart symbols.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These include hidden Markov models [14][15][16][17][18], Bayesian networks [9], neural networks [19], and wavelet networks [20,21].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is different to "on demand" recognition where the ink is only recognised when the user activates a widget. Kara and Stahovich (2004) have used "on demand" recognition in their system as the results of the recognition may interrupt the user during the design process. However, all the strokes must be sorted beforehand before intelligent ink editing can be accomplished.…”
Section: Ink Recognitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4. There are many approaches to recognition, which can be arranged in several main categories. There are image-based approaches, like the one given by Kara [15]. The general problem here is that segmentation and clustering cannot be done at all.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%