Cited by 71Advanced Clustering Algorithms ResearchGame Theory and Voting SystemsEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation

Grouping with Asymmetric Affinities: A Game-Theoretic Perspective

Torsello, A., Bulo, S.R., Pelillo, M.·2006·2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - Volume 1 (CVPR'06)

Abstract

Pairwise grouping and clustering approaches have traditionally worked under the assumption that the similarities or compatibilities between the elements to be grouped are symmetric. However, asymmetric compatibilities arise naturally in many areas of computer vision and pattern recognition. Hence, there is a need for a new generic approach to clustering and grouping that can deal with asymmetries in the compatibilities. In this paper, we present a generic framework for grouping and clustering derived from a game-theoretic formalization of the competition between the hypotheses of group membership, and apply it to perceptual grouping. In the proposed approach groups correspond to evolutionary stable strategies, a classic notion in evolutionary game theory. We also provide a combinatorial characterization of the stable strategies, and, hence, of the elements that belong to a group. Experiments show that our approach outperforms both state-of-the-art clustering-based perceptual grouping approacheswith symmetric compatibilities, and other approaches explicitly designed to make use of asymmetric compatibilities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2006.130

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Finding a large set of correspondences with high mutual compatibility can be formulated as an inlier selection process of a non-cooperative game.

    “Finding a large set of correspondences that express a high level of mutual compatibility can be formulated as an inlier selection process of a non-cooperative game [101].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Torsello, A., Bulo, S. R., & Pelillo, M.
Affiliations
Ca' Foscari University of Venice (IT)
Venue
2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - Volume 1 (CVPR'06)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2006-07-10
Volume
1
Pages
292-299
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2171707672
Cited by
71
References
19
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.92
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • ARCA (Università Ca' Foscari Venezia) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Advanced Clustering Algorithms Research
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Game Theory and Voting Systems
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Keywords
perceptual grouping, clustering, evolutionarily stable strategy, evolutionary game theory, combinatorial characterization, computer vision

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review