What is the approach to recognize a scene with deep learning (preferably Keras).
There are many examples showing how to classify images of limited size e.g. dogs/cats hand-written letters etc. There are also some examples for the detection of a searched object within a big image.
But, what is the best approach to recognize e.g. is it a class-room, bed-room or a dinning room? Create a data-set with that images? I think no. I think one should train a model with many things, which may appear in the scene, create a vector of the found things in the analysed image and using the second classifier (SVM or simple NN) classify the scene. Is it a right approach?
P.S.: Actually, I'm facing another problem, which IHMO the same. My "scene" is a microscope image. The images contain different sets of cells and artifacts. Depending on a set, a doctor makes a diagnosis. So I aim to train a CNN with the artifacts, which I extract with a simple morphologicyl methods. These artifacts (e.g. biological cells) will be my features. So the first level of the recognition - feature extraction is done by CNN, the later classification by SVM. Just wanted be sure, that I'm not reinventing a wheel.
In my opinion the comparison between your room-scenes and the biological scenes differ. Especially since your scene is a microscope image (probably of a limited predefined domain).
In this case, pure classification should work (without seeing the data). In other words the neural network should be able to figure out what it is seeing, without having you to hand-craft features (in case you need interpretability that's a whole new discussion).
Also there are lots approaches for scene understanding in this paper.
Related
I am currently testing out custom object detection using the Tensorflow API. But I don't quite seem to understand the theory behind it.
So if I for example download a version of MobileNet and use it to train on, lets say, red and green apples. Does it forget all the things that is has already been trained on? And if so, why does it then benefit to use MobileNet over building a CNN from scratch.
Thanks for any answers!
Does it forget all the things that is has already been trained on?
Yes, if you re-train a CNN previously trained on a large database with a new database containing fewer classes it will "forget" the old classes. However, the old pre-training can help learning the new classes, this is a training strategy called "transfert learning" of "fine tuning" depending on the exact approach.
As a rule of thumb it is generally not a good idea to create a new network architecture from scratch as better networks probably already exist. You may want to implement your custom architecture if:
You are learning CNN's and deep learning
You have a specific need and you proved that other architectures won't fit or will perform poorly
Usually, one take an existing pre-trained network and specialize it for their specific task using transfert learning.
A lot of scientific literature is available for free online if you want to learn. you can start with the Yolo series and R-CNN, Fast-RCNN and Faster-RCNN for detection networks.
The main concept behind object detection is that it divides the input image in a grid of N patches, and then for each patch, it generates a set of sub-patches with different aspect ratios, let's say it generates M rectangular sub-patches. In total you need to classify MxN images.
In general the idea is then analyze each sub-patch within each patch . You pass the sub-patch to the classifier in your model and depending on the model training, it will classify it as containing a green apple/red apple/nothing. If it is classified as a red apple, then this sub-patch is the bounding box of the object detected.
So actually, there are two parts you are interested in:
Generating as many sub-patches as possible to cover as many portions of the image as possible (Of course, the more sub-patches, the slower your model will be) and,
The classifier. The classifier is normally an already exisiting network (MobileNeet, VGG, ResNet...). This part is commonly used as the "backbone" and it will extract the features of the input image. With the classifier you can either choose to training it "from zero", therefore your weights will be adjusted to your specific problem, OR, you can load the weigths from other known problem and use them in your problem so you won't need to spend time training them. In this case, they will also classify the objects for which the classifier was training for.
Take a look at the Mask-RCNN implementation. I find very interesting how they explain the process. In this architecture, you will not only generate a bounding box but also segment the object of interest.
I successfully trained multi-classificator model, that was really easy with simple class related folder structure and keras.preprocessing.image.ImageDataGenerator with flow_from_directory (no one-hot encoding by hand btw!) after i just compile fit and evaluate - extremely well done pipeline by Keras!
BUT! when i decided to make my own (not cats, not dogs, not you_named) object detector - this is became a nightmare...
TFRecord and tf.Example are just madness! but ok, i almost get it (my dataset is small, i have plenty of ram, but who cares, write f. boilerplate, so much meh...)
The main thing - i just can't find any docs/tutorial how to make it with plain simple tf/keras, everyone just want to build up it on top of someone model, YOLO SSD FRCNN, even if they trying to detect completely new objects!!!
There two links about OD in official docs, and they both using some models underneath.
So my main question WHY ??? or i just blind..? -__-
It becomes a nightmare because Object Detection is way way harder than classification. The most simple object detector is this: first train a classifier on all your objects. Then when you want to detect objects in your image, slide a window over your image, and classify each window. Then, if your classifier is certain that a certain window is one of the objects, mark it as a successful detection.
But this approach has a lot of problems, mainly it's way (like waaaay) too slow. So, researcher improved it and invented RCNNs. That had it problems, so they invented Faster-RCNN, YOLO and SSD, all to make it faster and more accurate.
You won't find any tutorials online on how to implement the sliding window technique because it's not useful anyway, and you won't find any tutorials on how to implement the more advanced stuff because, well, the networks get complicated pretty quick.
Also note that using YOLO doesn't mean you should use the same weights as in YOLO. You can always train YOLO from scratch on your own data if you want by randomly initiliazing all the weights in the network layers. So the even if they trying to detect completely new objects!!! you mentioned isn't really valid. Also also note that I still would advise you to do use the weights they used in Yolo network. Transfer Learning is generally looked at as being a good idea, especially when starting out and especially in the image processing world, as many images share common features (like edges, for example).
I am having pretty much the same problem as my images are B/W diagrams, quite different from regular pictures, I want to train a custom model on just only diagrams.
I have found this documentation section in Tensorflow models repo:
https://github.com/tensorflow/models/blob/master/research/object_detection/README.md
It has a couple of sections explaining how to bring your own model and dataset in "extras" that could be a starting point.
I am using transfer learning using ResNet50 for snack packets recognition.
They are one and another similar in dominant color and shape. Those like in images below.
I have about 33 items to recognize.
I used FasterRCNN and SSD for ResNet50.
Not doing well and a lot of items are confused each other.
Which Deep Learning Architecture is suitable to recognize such objects?
Or are there any special tricks to have better recognition for such objects?
I think we need to have architecture to recognize detail pattern.
Make sure you are linking the original pre-trained network in caffe, or you're starting from the beginning with network training!
If you're looking to increase your dataset size, ill frequently take the same image set and rotate each image a few times.
Definitely decrease your image size, and consider giving your images less background noise to work with (people, variable backgrounds etc.)
In the past I have used Alexnet for similar issues with small feature differences.
best of luck!
I am new to machine learning field and based on what I have seen on youtube and read on internet I conjectured that it might be possible to count pedestrians in a video using tensorflow's object detection API.
Consequently, I did some research on tensorflow and read documentation about how to install tensorflow and then finally downloaded tensorflow and installed it. Using the sample files provided on github I adapted the code related to object_detection notebook provided here ->https://github.com/tensorflow/models/tree/master/research/object_detection.
I executed the adapted code on the videos that I collected while making changes to visualization_utils.py script so as to report number of objects that cross a defined region of interest on the screen. That is I collected bounding boxes dimensions (left,right,top, bottom) of person class and counted all the detection's that crossed the defined region of interest (imagine a set of two virtual vertical lines on video frame with left and right pixel value and then comparing detected bounding box's left & right values with predefined values). However, when I use this procedure I am missing on lot of pedestrians even though they are detected by the program. That is the program correctly classifies them as persons but sometimes they don't meet the criteria that I defined for counting and as such they are not counted. I want to know if there is a better way of counting unique pedestrians using the code rather than using the simplistic method that I am trying to develop. Is the approach that I am using the right one ? Could there be other better approaches ? Would appreciate any kind of help.
Please go easy on me as I am not a machine learning expert and just a novice.
You are using a pretrained model which is trained to identify people in general. I think you're saying that some people are pedestrians whereas some other people are not pedestrians, for example, someone standing waiting at the light is a pedestrian, but someone standing in their garden behind the street is not a pedestrian.
If I'm right, then you've reached the limitations of what you'll get with this model and you will probably have to train a model yourself to do what you want.
Since you're new to ML building your own dataset and training your own model probably sounds like a tall order, there's a learning curve to be sure. So I'll suggest the easiest way forward. That is, use the object detection model to identify people, then train a new binary classification model (about the easiest model to train) to identify if a particular person is a pedestrian or not (you will create a dataset of images and 1/0 values to identify them as pedestrian or not). I suggest this because a boolean classification model is about as easy a model as you can get and there are dozens of tutorials you can follow. Here's a good one:
https://github.com/aymericdamien/TensorFlow-Examples/blob/master/notebooks/3_NeuralNetworks/neural_network.ipynb
A few things to note when doing this:
When you build your dataset you will want a set of images, at least a few thousand along with the 1/0 classification for each (pedestrian or not pedestrian).
You will get much better results if you start with a model that is pretrained on imagenet than if you train it from scratch (though this might be a reasonable step-2 as it's an extra task). Especially if you only have a few thousand images to train it on.
Since your images will have multiple people in it you have a problem of identifying which person you want the model to classify as a pedestrian or not. There's no one right way to do this necessarily. If you have a yellow box surrounding the person the network may be successful in learning this notation. Another valid approach might be to remove the other people that were detected in the image by deleting them and leaving that area black. Centering on the target person may also be a reasonable approach.
My last bullet-point illustrates a problem with the idea as it's I've proposed it. The best solution would be to alter the object detection network to ouput both a bounding box per-person, and also a pedestrian/non pedestrian classification with it; or to only train the model to identify pedestrians, specifically, in the first place. I mention this as more optimal, but I consider it a more advanced task than my first suggestion, and a more complex dataset to manage. It's probably not the first thing you want to tackle as you learn your way around ML.
When training detection models, are images that are used in real life better (i.e. higher accuracy / mAP) than images of the same object but in the form of stock photo?
The more variety the better. If you train a network on images that all have a white background and expect it to perform under conditions with noisy backgrounds you should expect the results on unseen data to perform worse because the network never had a chance to learn distinguiting features of target object vs. background objects.
If you have images with transparent backgrounds one form of data augmentation that would be expected to improve results would be to place that image against many random backgrounds. The closer you come to realistic renderings of an image the better you can expect your results to be.
The more realistic examples you can augment your training dataset with, the better. Note that it generally does not help to add random noise to your data to generate larger training datasets, it only improves results when your expanded dataset contains realistic variants of the original images in the dataset.
My motto when training neural networks is this: The network will cheat any chance it gets. It will learn impressively well, but given the opportunity, it will take shortcuts. Don't let it take shortcuts. That often translates to: Make the problem harder such that no shortcut exists for it to take. Neural networks often perform better under more difficult conditions because the simplest solution it can arrive at is also the most general purpose. Read up on multi-task learning for some exciting examples that provide great food-for-thought.