2017
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-58961-9_5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning Graph Matching with a Graph-Based Perceptron in a Classification Context

Abstract: Many tasks in computer vision and pattern recognition are formulated as graph matching problems. Despite the NP-hard nature of the problem, fast and accurate approximations have led to significant progress in a wide range of applications. Learning graph matching functions from observed data, however, still remains a challenging issue. This paper presents an effective scheme to parametrize a graph model for object matching in a classification context. For this, we propose a representation based on a parametrize… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

3
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
(23 reference statements)
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The rst development of this idea was in paper (Raveaux et al, 2017). In this paper, we go further in three aspects: (i) Theoretically, we extend our method to multiclass problems.…”
Section: State Of the Artmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The rst development of this idea was in paper (Raveaux et al, 2017). In this paper, we go further in three aspects: (i) Theoretically, we extend our method to multiclass problems.…”
Section: State Of the Artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(iii) Finally, four datasets are added to the experimental study. The experimental phase shows that the newly proposed approach achieves various improvements compared to the prior approach published in (Raveaux et al, 2017 In this section, the choice of the perceptron algorithm is explained. Then, on a 2-class problem, the key concepts of our graph-based perceptron are presented along with the changes from the original perceptron paradigm (Rosenblatt, 1957).…”
Section: State Of the Artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We can separate these approaches in three main groups depending on its goal. By one hand, the first group (Raveaux R., 2017;Bunke, 2005, 2007;Leordeanu et al, 2012) focuses on the graph classification ratio, while the second group (Caetano et al, 2009;Cortés and Serratosa, 2016;Serratosa F., 2011;Cortés and Serratosa, 2015; ?) targets the node-to-node matching accuracy.…”
Section: State Of the Artmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We can divide the learning methods in three main groups depending on the objective function. The first group [7][8][9][10] addresses the recognition ratio for graph classification, while the second group [4,5,11,12] targets the hamming distance. Finally, there is a special case in [13] that does not learn the parameters to estimate the costs but tries to predict if an assignment between nodes is correct or not depending on the values of the costs matrix (the matrix with the costs of each edit operation).…”
Section: Deep Neural Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%