PreprintCited by 224Advanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesAdvanced Neural Network Applications

Aggregating Deep Convolutional Features for Image Retrieval

Open access
Babenko, Artem, Lempitsky, Victor·2015·arXiv

Abstract

Several recent works have shown that image descriptors produced by deep convolutional neural networks provide state-of-the-art performance for image classification and retrieval problems. It has also been shown that the activations from the convolutional layers can be interpreted as local features describing particular image regions. These local features can be aggregated using aggregation approaches developed for local features (e.g. Fisher vectors), thus providing new powerful global descriptors. In this paper we investigate possible ways to aggregate local deep features to produce compact global descriptors for image retrieval. First, we show that deep features and traditional hand-engineered features have quite different distributions of pairwise similarities, hence existing aggregation methods have to be carefully re-evaluated. Such re-evaluation reveals that in contrast to shallow features, the simple aggregation method based on sum pooling provides arguably the best performance for deep convolutional features. This method is efficient, has few parameters, and bears little risk of overfitting when e.g. learning the PCA matrix. Overall, the new compact global descriptor improves the state-of-the-art on four common benchmarks considerably.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1510.07493

Cites

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 27 · Cited by 224

Authors
Babenko, A., & Lempitsky, V.
Affiliations
  • Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (RU)
  • Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (RU)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2015
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1833123814
Cited by
224
References
27
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 3
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
Keywords
image retrieval, deep convolutional features, feature aggregation, global image descriptors, local features, Fisher vectors

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