Cited by 366Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques

Understanding image representations by measuring their equivariance and equivalence

Lenc, Karel, Vedaldi, Andrea·2015·2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

Despite the importance of image representations such as histograms of oriented gradients and deep Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), our theoretical understanding of them remains limited. Aiming at filling this gap, we investigate three key mathematical properties of representations: equivariance, invariance, and equivalence. Equivariance studies how transformations of the input image are encoded by the representation, invariance being a special case where a transformation has no effect. Equivalence studies whether two representations, for example two different parametrisations of a CNN, capture the same visual information or not. A number of methods to establish these properties empirically are proposed, including introducing transformation and stitching layers in CNNs. These methods are then applied to popular representations to reveal insightful aspects of their structure, including clarifying at which layers in a CNN certain geometric invariances are achieved. While the focus of the paper is theoretical, direct applications to structured-output regression are demonstrated too.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2015.7298701

Cites

10 of 10 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?

  • A vision model trained on ImageNet can be aligned with a model trained on Places-365 while maintaining good performance.

    “In their study, Lenc & Vedaldi (2015) made two notable findings: (1) A vision model trained on ImageNet (Russakovsky et al., 2015) can be aligned with a model trained on Places-365 (Zhou et al., 2017) while maintaining good performance;”

    From The Platonic Representation Hypothesis (2024) · cites this paper as Lenc & Vedaldi (2015)

  • The early layers of convolutional networks are more interchangeable than later layers.

    “(2) The early layers of these convolutional networks are more interchangeable than later layers.”

    From The Platonic Representation Hypothesis (2024) · cites this paper as Lenc & Vedaldi (2015)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lenc, K., & Vedaldi, A.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2015-06
Pages
991-999
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1912570122
Cited by
366
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 9
FWCI
13.40
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)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • 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
Keywords
image representation, equivariance, invariance, representation equivalence, convolutional neural networks, geometric invariance, histogram of oriented gradients

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