Image Reconstruction from Bag-of-Visual-Words
Open accessAbstract
The objective of this study is to reconstruct images from Bag-of-Visual-Words (BoVW), which is the de facto standard feature for image retrieval and recognition. BoVW is defined here as a histogram of quantized descriptors extracted densely on a regular grid at a single scale. Despite its wide use, no report describes reconstruction of the original image of a BoVW. This task is challenging for two reasons: 1) BoVW includes quantization errors when local descriptors are assigned to visual words. 2) BoVW lacks spatial information of local descriptors when we count the occurrence of visual words. To tackle this difficult task, we use a large-scale image database to estimate the spatial arrangement of local descriptors. Then this task creates a jigsaw puzzle problem with adjacency and global location costs of visual words. Solving this optimization problem is also challenging because it is known as an NP-Hard problem. We propose a heuristic but efficient method to optimize it. To underscore the effectiveness of our method, we apply it to BoVWs extracted from about 100 different categories and demonstrate that it can reconstruct the original images, although the image features lack spatial information and include quantization errors.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
There is a significant amount of work in understanding the representation of deep neural networks by means of artifact images.
“There is a significant amount of work in understanding the representation of DNN by means of artifact images, [41,100,105,111].”
From A Survey of Methods for Explaining Black Box Models (2019) · cites this paper as [41]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 81
- Authors
- Kato, H., & Harada, T.
- Affiliations
- The University of Tokyo (JP)
- Venue
- 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2014-06
- Pages
- 955-962
- ISSN
- 1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2009049007
- Cited by
- 81
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 4.84
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (26540079)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Processing and 3D Reconstruction
- Keywords
- image reconstruction, bag of visual words, visual words, local descriptors, NP-hard optimization, heuristic optimization
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