Toward Open Set Recognition
Abstract
To date, almost all experimental evaluations of machine learning-based recognition algorithms in computer vision have taken the form of "closed set" recognition, whereby all testing classes are known at training time. A more realistic scenario for vision applications is "open set" recognition, where incomplete knowledge of the world is present at training time, and unknown classes can be submitted to an algorithm during testing. This paper explores the nature of open set recognition and formalizes its definition as a constrained minimization problem. The open set recognition problem is not well addressed by existing algorithms because it requires strong generalization. As a step toward a solution, we introduce a novel "1-vs-set machine," which sculpts a decision space from the marginal distances of a 1-class or binary SVM with a linear kernel. This methodology applies to several different applications in computer vision where open set recognition is a challenging problem, including object recognition and face verification. We consider both in this work, with large scale cross-dataset experiments performed over the Caltech 256 and ImageNet sets, as well as face matching experiments performed over the Labeled Faces in the Wild set. The experiments highlight the effectiveness of machines adapted for open set evaluation compared to existing 1-class and binary SVMs for the same tasks.
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?
If a robot's vision system is fooled by data outside of its training data distribution, the consequences of acting on false but high-confidence detections can be disastrous.
“For instance, if a robot's vision system (object detection) is fooled by data outside of its training data distribution [244], the consequences of acting on false but high-confidence detections can be disastrous.”
From Applications and Challenges of Artificial Intelligence in Space Missions (2024) · cites this paper as [244]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 55 · Cited by 1,573
- Authors
- Scheirer, W. J., de Rezende Rocha, A., Sapkota, A., & Boult, T. E.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- University of Colorado Colorado Springs (US)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
- Published
- 2013-07
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1757-1772
- ISSN
- 0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
- 2160-9292
- OpenAlex
- W2119880843
- Cited by
- 1,573
- References
- 55
- Citations by year
- 2026: 243 · 2025: 215 · 2024: 217 · 2023: 220 · 2022: 172 · 2021: 155 · 2020: 116 · 2019: 69 · 2018: 62 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 10.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (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 › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- open-set recognition, closed-set recognition, object recognition, face verification, face matching, cross-dataset generalization, unknown classes
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Biometric Identification, Support Vector Machine
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