Owen Carmichael : Teaching : ECS 289H

Advanced Image Processing and Analysis

UC Davis, Spring 2008

 

Home / News

Affiliations / Contact

Research

Papers

Teaching

Community Resources

Reading Groups

Leisure

 

Lecture: MWF 4:10 – 5 PM Wellman 207

Office Hours: Tuesday 12-2 PM, 612E School of Medicine Neurosciences Building

Course web page:  Available from MyUCDavis

Number of units: 4

Course overview

This course gives an overview of state-of-the-art methods for automated extraction of useful information from images.  ÒImagesÓ include data acquired from photographic cameras, 3D surface range sensors, and volumetric biomedical imaging devices. The course material emphasizes core principles and methods that are shared between imaging modalities, and therefore is designed to be relevant to a broad range of graduate students whose research involves imaging data: students interested in computer vision, graphics, visualization, geometric modeling, medical imaging, applied mathematics, and imaging-related biomedical sciences are all encouraged to enroll.  Students will need to have a fairly strong grasp of linear algebra and basic calculus, but no prior course material in imaging is strictly required to enroll. The course material will be tuned to the interests of enrolled students, but it tentatively covers a range of image processing tasks, including low-level data pre-processing; mid-level grouping, alignment, and feature extraction; and high-level object detection and retrieval.  See below for a tentative course schedule.

Key components of the course

This is essentially a reading course in which each week is dedicated to a particular problem area in image processing. Two papers that typify the current state of the art in that area are featured each week.  The Monday and Wednesday lectures provide the background information that students will need to understand the key attributes of the problem area and the paper material.  Each Friday, one student will give a presentation that summarizes one of the two assigned papers; the rest of the students read the other paper and write a one-page summary of its contents.  I expect that the presentation will take about half of the Friday lecture period and discussion of the other paper will take the other half.

1.     Lectures: The Monday and Wednesday lectures are designed to give a broad overview of the problem of the week, including its relevance, key issues or aspects of the problem, variants of the problem, major schools of thought, controversies, and so on.  I will also use this time to provide background that is more specifically needed to understand the assigned papers.  In particular, difficult / unusual math and unclear exposition are two aspects of the papers that I will try to deal with on Monday and Wednesday.

2.    Paper summaries: Each week, all the students who are not making the Friday presentation will read the paper that the presenter of the week has decided not to present.  By the start of class on Friday, all of those students are expected to email me a one-page summary of the paper.  The paper summary should include these sections:

a.     The specific problem the paper addresses

b.    Key limitations to previous solutions

c.     The innovation of this paper: which of the prior limitations does it overcome and how?

d.    The method: how does it work?

e.     Key experimental results

f.      Editorial: Was the paper convincing?  Are there any glaring weaknesses or questions that it should have addressed?  Etc.

This format does not make much sense when we read a review paper; they donÕt present one particular algorithm that you can describe, for example.  Paper summaries for the review articles can be more open-ended.

The student making the presentation of the week does not need to turn in a paper summary that week.  In addition, students may skip one other paper summary of their choosing at no penalty.  Since there are lecture 10 weeks in the quarter, this means each student is required to write 8 paper summaries.

On Friday, students should be ready to discuss the paper they did the summary on.  Discussion of this paper will take place after the presentation of the week.

3.    Presentations:  Each student is expected to make one paper presentation; students will sign up for a Friday presentation slot on a first-come, first-served basis. The presentation of the week should consist mainly of slides shown on the projector, along with written material on the board as needed.  The presentation should cover the same points as listed above for the written summaries.  Presenters should plan on preparing about 15-20 minutes worth of slide material; a good rough estimate is to have about one slide per minute, i.e. roughly two or three slides each for the problem addressed, limitations to previous solutions, etc. The presenter can choose to make the presentation on his or her own laptop, or show it on mine. Presenters who want to use my laptop should let me know beforehand if the slide format is something other than PDF, PowerPoint, or Keynote; I need to make sure that my machine can show the slides properly.

4.    Final Project:  A final project, determined in consultation with me in the middle of the quarter, will be required of each student.  Each student is free to choose whether he or she wants to write a 7-10 page paper or do a programming project.  The paper is expected to be a treatment of a particular problem area—either a subset of an area I talked about in lecture or a completely separate one related to image processing—that supplies the problem area with some sort of structure, e.g. a taxonomy of existing approaches, or a catalog of key issues that must be dealt with.  The programming project should be an implementation and evaluation of one or more image processing algorithms, along with a writeup of the results.  A key principle of the final project is that if it is at all possible to design it so that it advances your own research agenda in some way, you should absolutely do so.  Students who are involved in a specific research project or lab, but are unsure how to design a course project that might possibly dovetail with it, should talk to me about it.

5.     Office hours: The lectures are there to get you up to speed on the paper material, even if you have little background in image processing; still, some of these papers might be difficult to understand anyway. Office hours are held early in the week to give you a chance to get a better grasp of the papers while you still have plenty of time to work on your summary or presentation.  Picking up the paper for the first time on Thursday night is not an especially good idea.  Sending me an email saying ÒI donÕt understand the paperÓ on Friday after a week of complete silence on your part is an even worse idea.

Grading

  1. Final project: 25%
  2. Presentation: 15%
  3. Paper summaries: 60%

Schedule

Students will fill out a survey during the first week of the course that includes questions about what specific image processing topics they are interested in learning about.  The tentative course schedule, shown below, will be modified as needed to fit the indicated interests.  As is, the course schedule is designed to move from Òdown to up;Ó that is, we start with low-level removal of noise from images, move into the extraction of coherent regions, ÒinterestingÓ features, and alignment of multiple data sets, and end up talking about the extraction of higher-level, more semanatically-meaningful information such as the locations or categories of objects in the image.  PDFs of all papers will be available on the password-protected course website on MyUCDavis; please do not distribute the PDFs to anyone else.  I will also put PDFs of the Monday and Wednesday slides up on the MyUCDavis site; please donÕt distribute those around either.

Week

Dates

Problem area

Papers

1

3/31

4/2

4/4

Smoothing

Scale-Space and Edge Detection Using Anisotropic Diffusion. P. Perona,J. Malik. IEEE Transactions On Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,   July 1990 (Vol. 12, No. 7)   pp. 629-639
 


Non-iterative, Feature-Preserving Mesh Smoothing. Thouis R. Jones, FrŽdo Durand, and Mathieu Desbrun.  Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 2003 / ACM TOG

2

4/7

4/9

4/11

Segmenting images into coherent regions

Normalized cuts and image segmentation.  J. Shi; J. Malik; IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Volume 22,  Issue 8,  Aug. 2000 Page(s):888 – 905

Discriminative learning of Markov random fields for segmentation of 3D scan data.  Anguelov, D.   Taskar, B.   Chatalbashev, V.   Koller, D.   Gupta, D.   Heitz, G.   Ng, A.   Proc. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2005.

3

4/14

4/16

4/18

Guest lecturer for 4/14 and 4/16: Nina Amenta.

4/16 should be a paper presentation

Local features

Scale & Affine Invariant Interest Point Detectors. 
K Mikolajczyk, C Schmid - International Journal of Computer Vision, 2004

Using spin images for efficient object recognition in cluttered 3D scenes. AE Johnson, M Hebert - IEEE Transactions On Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 1999

4

4/21

4/23

4/25

Alignment

Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey.  Pluim, J.P.W.   Maintz, J.B.A.   Viergever, M.A, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging Aug. 2003
Volume: 22,  Issue: 8

Consistent image registration. GE Christensen, HJ Johnson.  IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2001 Jul;20(7):568-82.

5

4/28

4/30

5/2

Fusing data sets into a composite whole

Creating Full View Panoramic Image Mosaics And Environment Maps. R Szeliski, HY Shum.  Proceedings Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, pg. 251-258, 1997.

A Globally Optimal Algorithm for Robust TV-L1 Range Image Integration. C Zach, T Pock, H Bischof - Proc. ICCV, 2007

6

5/5

5/7

5/9

Object detection

Object Detection Using the Statistics of Parts.  H Schneiderman, T Kanade - International Journal of Computer Vision, 2004

Pictorial Structures for Object Recognition. PF Felzenszwalb, DP Huttenlocher - International Journal of Computer Vision, 2005

7

5/12

5/14

5/16

Context

The role of context in object recognition.  Aude Oliva and Antonio Torralba. Trends in Cognitive Sciences Volume 11, Issue 12,  December 2007, Pages 520-527

Putting objects in perspective. D Hoiem, AA Efros, M Hebert - Proc. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2006.

8

5/19

5/21

5/23

Aligning shape and appearance models to imaging data

Active Appearance Models Revisited.  I Matthews, S Baker - International Journal of Computer Vision, 2004

3D image segmentation of deformable objects with joint shape-intensity prior models using level sets.  J Yang, JS Duncan - Medical Image Analysis, 2004

9

5/28

5/30

Classification, clustering, and retrieval

Object class recognition by unsupervised scale-invariant learning. R Fergus, P Perona, A Zisserman – Proceedings Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2003.

Content-Based 3-D Model Retrieval: A Survey.
 Y. Yang, H. Lin, Y. Zhang, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics C, V. 37 (6), 2007.

10

6/3

6/5

Shape parameterization and analysis

Localized components analysis.  D Alcantara, O Carmichael, E Delson, W Harcourt et al. – Proceedings Inf Process Med Imaging, 2007

Principal geodesic analysis for the study of nonlinear statistics of shape. PT Fletcher, C Lu, SM Pizer, S Joshi, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 2004

Academic Integrity

Each student must produce their own individual paper summaries, final project, and presentation.  Discussing these assignments with classmates is fine but outright copying from other students or any other source is forbidden.   Any instance of suspected cheating or plagiarism will be referred to the Office of Student Judicial Affairs for adjudication. The "Code of Academic Conduct" describes relevant policies and procedures. (A copy of this document can be obtained through the Office of Student Judicial Affairs, 752-1128; http://sja.ucdavis.edu.).