The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Concept-Based Video Retrieval
Abstract
In this paper, we review 300 references on video retrieval, indicating when text-only solutions are unsatisfactory and showing the promising alternatives which are in majority concept-based. Therefore, central to our discussion is the notion of a semantic concept: an objective linguistic description of an observable entity. Specifically, we present our view on how its automated detection, selection under uncertainty, and interactive usage might solve the major scientific problem for video retrieval: the semantic gap. To bridge the gap, we lay down the anatomy of a concept-based video search engine. We present a component-wise decomposition of such an interdisciplinary multimedia system, covering influences from information retrieval, computer vision, machine learning, and human–computer interaction. For each of the components we review state-of-the-art solutions in the literature, each having different characteristics and merits. Because of these differences, we cannot understand the progress in video retrieval without serious evaluation efforts such as carried out in the NIST TRECVID benchmark. We discuss its data, tasks, results, and the many derived community initiatives in creating annotations and baselines for repeatable experiments. We conclude with our perspective on future challenges and opportunities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition
Rabiner, L. R. (1989) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/5.18626 · Cited by 22,743
Introduction to Information Retrieval
Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2008) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809071 · Cited by 11,288
Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals
Allen, J. F. (1983) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/182.358434 · Cited by 7,593 · cited 1×
“The authors represent the relation between various concept detectors using an adaptation of Allen’s interval algebra [5].”
Method
Cited by
Large-scale visual sentiment ontology and detectors using adjective noun pairs
Borth, D., Ji, R., Chen, T., Breuel, T., & Chang, S.-F. (2013) · Proceedings of the 21st ACM international conference on Multimedia · doi:10.1145/2502081.2502282 · Cited by 851
A Survey on Visual Content-Based Video Indexing and Retrieval
Hu, W., Xie, N., Li, L., Zeng, X., & Maybank, S. (2011) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews) · doi:10.1109/tsmcc.2011.2109710 · Cited by 585
LifeLogging: Personal Big Data
Gurrin, C., Smeaton, A. F., & Doherty, A. R. (2014) · Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval · doi:10.1561/1500000033 · Cited by 434
Event-based media processing and analysis: A survey of the literature
Tzelepis, C., Ma, Z., Mezaris, V., Ionescu, B., Kompatsiaris, I., Boato, G., Sebe, N., & Yan, S. (2016) · Image and Vision Computing · doi:10.1016/j.imavis.2016.05.005 · Cited by 49
Shirahama, K., & Grzegorzek, M. (2016) · Multimedia Tools and Applications · doi:10.1007/s11042-014-2292-8 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Snoek, C. G. M., & Worring, M.
- Venue
- Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2009-05-27
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 215-322
- ISSN
- 1554-0669 (ISSN-L)
- 1554-0677
- OpenAlex
- W4296262844
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 30.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.