Cited by 260Face and Expression RecognitionFace recognition and analysisFace Recognition and Perception

Graph-preserving sparse nonnegative matrix factorization with application to facial expression recognition

Ruicong Zhi, Flierl, Markus, Ruan, Qiuqi, Kleijn, W Bastiaan·2011·IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics)

Abstract

In this paper, a novel graph-preserving sparse nonnegative matrix factorization (GSNMF) algorithm is proposed for facial expression recognition. The GSNMF algorithm is derived from the original NMF algorithm by exploiting both sparse and graph-preserving properties. The latter may contain the class information of the samples. Therefore, GSNMF can be conducted as an unsupervised or a supervised dimension reduction method. A sparse representation of the facial images is obtained by minimizing the l(1)-norm of the basis images. Furthermore, according to the graph embedding theory, the neighborhood of the samples is preserved by retaining the graph structure in the mapped space. The GSNMF decomposition transforms the high-dimensional facial expression images into a locality-preserving subspace with sparse representation. To guarantee convergence, we use the projected gradient method to calculate the nonnegative solution of GSNMF. Experiments are conducted on the JAFFE database and the Cohn-Kanade database with unoccluded and partially occluded facial images. The results show that the GSNMF algorithm provides better facial representations and achieves higher recognition rates than nonnegative matrix factorization. Moreover, GSNMF is also more robust to partial occlusions than other tested methods.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tsmcb.2010.2044788

Cites

51 of 51 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhi, R., Flierl, M., Ruan, Q., & Kleijn, W. B.
Affiliations
  • Beijing Jiaotong University (CN)
  • KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics)
Published
2011-02
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
38-52
ISSN
  • 1083-4419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0492
OpenAlex
W2142584058
Cited by
260
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 10
FWCI
11.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part B (Cybernetics) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face and Expression Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
facial expression recognition, sparse representation, graph embedding, local structure preservation, dimensionality reduction, partial occlusion robustness, gradient projection, JAFFE database, Cohn-Kanade dataset
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Facial Expression, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Male, Multivariate Analysis, Databases, Factual, Biometric Identification

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