Cited by 840Neural Networks and ApplicationsFace and Expression RecognitionSpeech Recognition and Synthesis

Separating Style and Content with Bilinear Models

Tenenbaum, Joshua B., Freeman, William T.·2000·Neural Computation

Abstract

Perceptual systems routinely separate “content” from “style,” classifying familiar words spoken in an unfamiliar accent, identifying a font or handwriting style across letters, or recognizing a familiar face or object seen under unfamiliar viewing conditions. Yet a general and tractable computational model of this ability to untangle the underlying factors of perceptual observations remains elusive (Hofstadter, 1985). Existing factor models (Mardia, Kent, & Bibby, 1979; Hinton & Zemel, 1994; Ghahramani, 1995; Bell & Sejnowski, 1995; Hinton, Dayan, Frey, & Neal, 1995; Dayan, Hinton, Neal, & Zemel, 1995; Hinton & Ghahramani, 1997) are either insufficiently rich to capture the complex interactions of perceptually meaningful factors such as phoneme and speaker accent or letter and font, or do not allow efficient learning algorithms. We present a general framework for learning to solve two-factor tasks using bilinear models, which provide sufficiently expressive representations of factor interactions but can nonetheless be fit to data using efficient algorithms based on the singular value decomposition and expectation-maximization. We report promising results on three different tasks in three different perceptual domains: spoken vowel classification with a benchmark multi-speaker database, extrapolation of fonts to unseen letters, and translation of faces to novel illuminants.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/089976600300015349

Cites

61 of 61 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tenenbaum, J. B., & Freeman, W. T.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories (United States) (US)
Venue
Neural Computation
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2000-06-01
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
1247-1283
ISSN
  • 0899-7667 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-888X
OpenAlex
W2170653751
Cited by
840
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 61 · 2020: 58 · 2019: 70 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 34 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 30
FWCI
13.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neural Computation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Neural Networks and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face and Expression Recognition
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech Recognition and Synthesis
Keywords
bilinear model, factor models, perceptual learning, speaker accent, singular value decomposition, expectation-maximization algorithm, factor interactions
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Face, Humans, Learning, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Speech Perception, Linear Models, Neural Networks, Computer

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