Cited by 3,442Image Retrieval and Classification TechniquesAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Automated Flower Classification over a Large Number of Classes

Nilsback, Maria-Elena, Zisserman, Andrew·2008·2008 Sixth Indian Conference on Computer Vision, Graphics & Image Processing

Abstract

We investigate to what extent combinations of features can improve classification performance on a large dataset of similar classes. To this end we introduce a 103 class flower dataset. We compute four different features for the flowers, each describing different aspects, namely the local shape/texture, the shape of the boundary, the overall spatial distribution of petals, and the colour. We combine the features using a multiple kernel framework with a SVM classifier. The weights for each class are learnt using the method of Varma and Ray, which has achieved state of the art performance on other large dataset, such as Caltech 101/256. Our dataset has a similar challenge in the number of classes, but with the added difficulty of large between class similarity and small within class similarity. Results show that learning the optimum kernel combination of multiple features vastly improves the performance, from 55.1% for the best single feature to 72.8% for the combination of all features.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icvgip.2008.47

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • On the Flower dataset, using class tokens from all blocks gives a relatively better improvement (only 1.2%) compared to using class tokens from the last four blocks.

    “We find some exception to this on the Flower dataset [38] where using class tokens from all blocks have relatively better improvement (only 1.2%), compared to the class tokens from the last four blocks (Table 5).”

    From Intriguing Properties of Vision Transformers (2021) · cites this paper as [38]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 20 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nilsback, M.-E., & Zisserman, A.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
2008 Sixth Indian Conference on Computer Vision, Graphics & Image Processing
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2008-12
Pages
722-729
OpenAlex
W2533598788
Cited by
3,442
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 304 · 2025: 516 · 2024: 502 · 2023: 447 · 2022: 316 · 2021: 349 · 2020: 223 · 2019: 212 · 2018: 125 · 2017: 96 · 2016: 93 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 56 · 2013: 41 · 2012: 34
FWCI
15.48
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Indian Conference on Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Microsoft Research
  • Royal Academy of Engineering
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
flower classification, large number of classes, feature combination, multiple kernel learning, support vector machine, color features

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