Large-Scale Cross-Modality Search via Collective Matrix Factorization Hashing
Abstract
By transforming data into binary representation, i.e., Hashing, we can perform high-speed search with low storage cost, and thus, Hashing has collected increasing research interest in the recent years. Recently, how to generate Hashcode for multimodal data (e.g., images with textual tags, documents with photos, and so on) for large-scale cross-modality search (e.g., searching semantically related images in database for a document query) is an important research issue because of the fast growth of multimodal data in the Web. To address this issue, a novel framework for multimodal Hashing is proposed, termed as Collective Matrix Factorization Hashing (CMFH). The key idea of CMFH is to learn unified Hashcodes for different modalities of one multimodal instance in the shared latent semantic space in which different modalities can be effectively connected. Therefore, accurate cross-modality search is supported. Based on the general framework, we extend it in the unsupervised scenario where it tries to preserve the Euclidean structure, and in the supervised scenario where it fully exploits the label information of data. The corresponding theoretical analysis and the optimization algorithms are given. We conducted comprehensive experiments on three benchmark data sets for cross-modality search. The experimental results demonstrate that CMFH can significantly outperform several state-of-the-art cross-modality Hashing methods, which validates the effectiveness of the proposed CMFH.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
SSVH's similarity matrix is only constructed in the initialization stage without considering temporal information, which limits the improvement of hash code quality.
“One of the main drawbacks is that the similarity matrix is only constructed in the initialization stage without considering the temporal information, which limits the improvement of hash code quality.”
From Unsupervised Deep Video Hashing via Balanced Code for Large-Scale Video Retrieval (2019) · cites this paper as [51]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 59 · Cited by 218
- Authors
- Ding, G., Guo, Y., Zhou, J., & Gao, Y.
- Affiliations
- Tsinghua University (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
- Published
- 2016-11
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 5427-5440
- ISSN
- 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0042
- OpenAlex
- W2512032049
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 37
- FWCI
- 21.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (61571269, 61271394)
- 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 › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
- Keywords
- collective matrix factorization, hashing, image-text retrieval, unsupervised hashing, supervised hashing, label information, large-scale search
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