Cited by 1,633Mathematical Analysis and Transform MethodsImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

Invariant Scattering Convolution Networks

Bruna, Joan, Mallat, S.·2013·IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

Abstract

A wavelet scattering network computes a translation invariant image representation which is stable to deformations and preserves high-frequency information for classification. It cascades wavelet transform convolutions with nonlinear modulus and averaging operators. The first network layer outputs SIFT-type descriptors, whereas the next layers provide complementary invariant information that improves classification. The mathematical analysis of wavelet scattering networks explains important properties of deep convolution networks for classification. A scattering representation of stationary processes incorporates higher order moments and can thus discriminate textures having the same Fourier power spectrum. State-of-the-art classification results are obtained for handwritten digits and texture discrimination, with a Gaussian kernel SVM and a generative PCA classifier.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tpami.2012.230

Cites

6 of 6 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?

  • Many approaches have been presented to enhance robustness, aiming at learning invariant CNN representations with respect to different types of transformations such as scale, rotation, or both.

    “Therefore, many approaches have been presented to enhance robustness, aiming at learning invariant CNN representations with respect to different types of transformations such as scale (Kim et al. 2014;Bruna and Mallat 2013), rotation (Bruna and Mallat 2013;Cheng et al. 2016;Worrall et al. 2017;Zhou et al. 2017b), or both (Jaderberg et al. 2015).”

    From Deep Learning for Generic Object Detection: A Survey (2020) · cites this paper as Bruna and Mallat 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bruna, J., & Mallat, S.
Affiliations
  • Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences (US)
  • École Normale Supérieure - PSL (FR)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Published
2013-08
Volume
35
Issue
8
Pages
1872-1886
ISSN
  • 0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
  • 2160-9292
OpenAlex
W2072072671
Cited by
1,633
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 98 · 2025: 119 · 2024: 149 · 2023: 169 · 2022: 148 · 2021: 171 · 2020: 164 · 2019: 152 · 2018: 142 · 2017: 120 · 2016: 84 · 2015: 72 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 2
FWCI
121.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematical Analysis and Transform Methods
  • 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
Keywords
wavelet scattering network, translation invariance, image classification, SIFT descriptors, texture discrimination, stationary processes, higher-order moments, Fourier power spectrum, handwritten digit recognition

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