Cited by 82Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot LearningAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsMachine Learning and Data Classification

Incremental Learning of NCM Forests for Large-Scale Image Classification

Open access
Ristin, Marko, Guillaumin, Matthieu, Gall, Juergen, Van Gool, Luc·2014·2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Abstract

In recent years, large image data sets such as "ImageNet", "TinyImages" or ever-growing social networks like "Flickr" have emerged, posing new challenges to image classification that were not apparent in smaller image sets. In particular, the efficient handling of dynamically growing data sets, where not only the amount of training images, but also the number of classes increases over time, is a relatively unexplored problem. To remedy this, we introduce Nearest Class Mean Forests (NCMF), a variant of Random Forests where the decision nodes are based on nearest class mean (NCM) classification. NCMFs not only outperform conventional random forests, but are also well suited for integrating new classes. To this end, we propose and compare several approaches to incorporate data from new classes, so as to seamlessly extend the previously trained forest instead of re-training them from scratch. In our experiments, we show that NCMFs trained on small data sets with 10 classes can be extended to large data sets with 1000 classes without significant loss of accuracy compared to training from scratch on the full data.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2014.467

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [27]27. A. Yao, J. Gall, C. Leistner, and L. Van Gool. Interac- tive object detection. In CVPR, 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ristin, M., Guillaumin, M., Gall, J., & Van Gool, L.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Venue
2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2014-06
Pages
3654-3661
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2007556421
Cited by
82
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1
FWCI
5.50
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (GA 1927/1-1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Machine Learning and Data Classification
Keywords
incremental learning, random forest, image classification, large-scale image databases, ImageNet, Flickr

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