Cited by 179Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

Logic Tensor Networks for Semantic Image Interpretation

Open access
Donadello, Ivan, Serafini, Luciano, d'Avila Garcez, Artur·2017·Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Semantic Image Interpretation (SII) is the task of extracting structured semantic descriptions from images. It is widely agreed that the combined use of visual data and background knowledge is of great importance for SII. Recently, Statistical Relational Learning (SRL) approaches have been developed for reasoning under uncertainty and learning in the presence of data and rich knowledge. Logic Tensor Networks (LTNs) are a SRL framework which integrates neural networks with first-order fuzzy logic to allow (i) efficient learning from noisy data in the presence of logical constraints, and (ii) reasoning with logical formulas describing general properties of the data. In this paper, we develop and apply LTNs to two of the main tasks of SII, namely, the classification of an image's bounding boxes and the detection of the relevant part-of relations between objects. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first successful application of SRL to such SII tasks. The proposed approach is evaluated on a standard image processing benchmark. Experiments show that background knowledge in the form of logical constraints can improve the performance of purely data-driven approaches, including the state-of-the-art Fast Region-based Convolutional Neural Networks (Fast R-CNN). Moreover, we show that the use of logical background knowledge adds robustness to the learning system when errors are present in the labels of the training data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.24963/ijcai.2017/221

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 26 · Cited by 179

Authors
Donadello, I., Serafini, L., & d'Avila Garcez, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Trento (IT)
  • Fondazione Bruno Kessler (IT)
  • City, University of London, London, UK
Venue
Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2017-08
Pages
1596-1602
OpenAlex
W2619531163
Cited by
179
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2
FWCI
4.32
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Iris (University of Trento) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
logic tensor networks, statistical relational learning, prior knowledge, part-whole relations, object detection, noisy training data, label errors, Fast R-CNN

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