Method and apparatus for training a neural network to learn hierarchical representations of objects and to detect and classify objects with uncertain training data

0Associated
Cases 
0Associated
Defendants 
0Accused
Products 
67Forward
Citations 
0
Petitions 
4
Assignments
First Claim
1. A method for growing a pattern tree having a root and at least one child, said method comprising the steps of:
 (a) training the root of the pattern tree;
(b) training the children of the pattern tree; and
(c) creating at least one integration network, where said integration network receives its input from at least one of the children and root.
4 Assignments
0 Petitions
Accused Products
Abstract
A signal processing apparatus and concomitant method for learning and integrating features from multiple resolutions for detecting and/or classifying objects are presented. Neural networks in a pattern tree structure with treestructured descriptions of objects in terms of simple subpatterns, are grown and trained to detect and integrate the subpatterns. A plurality of objective functions and their approximations are presented to train the neural networks to detect subpatterns of features of some class of objects. Objective functions for training neural networks to detect objects whose positions in the training data are uncertain and for addressing supervised learning where there are potential errors in the training data are also presented.
83 Citations
View as Search Results
Cognition integrator and language  
Patent #
US 7,873,223 B2
Filed 08/28/2006

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Parallelization of bayesian network structure learning  
Patent #
US 7,870,081 B2
Filed 12/31/2004

Current Assignee
Intel Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Intel Corporation

Context driven image mining to generate imagebased biomarkers  
Patent #
US 20110122138A1
Filed 01/18/2011

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Pose estimating device and pose estimating method  
Patent #
US 7,940,960 B2
Filed 10/25/2007

Current Assignee
Toshiba Digital Solutions Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Toshiba Corporation

Automatic image analysis and quantification for fluorescence in situ hybridization  
Patent #
US 8,019,134 B2
Filed 11/30/2006

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Analyzing pixel data using image, thematic and object layers of a computerimplemented network structure  
Patent #
US 7,801,361 B2
Filed 02/21/2007

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Hybrid architecture for acquisition, recognition, and fusion  
Patent #
US 7,536,365 B2
Filed 12/08/2005

Current Assignee
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Northrop Grumman Corporation

Method for processing data structures  
Patent #
US 7,574,053 B2
Filed 01/10/2007

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Analyzing pixel data using image, thematic and object layers of a computerimplemented network structure  
Patent #
US 20080008349A1
Filed 02/21/2007

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Geometric pattern matching using dynamic feature combinations  
Patent #
US 7,340,089 B2
Filed 01/10/2005

Current Assignee
National Instruments Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
National Instruments Corporation

Highorder entropy error functions for neural classifiers  
Patent #
US 7,346,497 B2
Filed 05/08/2001

Current Assignee
Intel Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Intel Corporation

Selfoptimizing classifier  
Patent #
US 7,362,892 B2
Filed 07/02/2003

Current Assignee
Lockheed Martin Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Lockheed Martin Corporation

POSE ESTIMATING DEVICE AND POSE ESTIMATING METHOD  
Patent #
US 20080152218A1
Filed 10/25/2007

Current Assignee
Toshiba Digital Solutions Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Toshiba Digital Solutions Corporation

Computeraided image analysis  
Patent #
US 7,383,237 B2
Filed 02/06/2006

Current Assignee
Health Discovery Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
James Roberts, SIMPSON K. RUSSELL, OHAYER TIMOTHY P., Memorial Health Systems Incorporated, Joe Mckenzie, Garry L. Carls, Glynn Bergeron, John E. Matthews, Curtis Anderson, Peter J. Farley, Jules B. Paderewski, Julian N. Stern

Automatic image analysis and quantification for fluorescence in situ hybridization  
Patent #
US 20080137937A1
Filed 11/30/2006

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Hybrid architecture for acquisition, recognition, and fusion  
Patent #
US 20080162389A1
Filed 12/08/2005

Current Assignee
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation

Parallelization of Bayesian Network Structure Learning  
Patent #
US 20080275827A1
Filed 12/31/2004

Current Assignee
Intel Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Intel Corporation

Generating applications that analyze image data using a semantic cognition network  
Patent #
US 7,467,159 B2
Filed 10/17/2006

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Generating applications that analyze image data using a semantic cognition network  
Patent #
US 20070036440A1
Filed 10/17/2006

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Parallelization of bayesian network structure learning  
Patent #
US 20070094214A1
Filed 07/15/2005

Current Assignee
Intel Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Intel Corporation

Method for processing data structures  
Patent #
US 20070112823A1
Filed 01/10/2007

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Methods and apparatus for transmitting signals through network elements for classification  
Patent #
US 7,287,015 B2
Filed 09/30/2004

Current Assignee
Google LLC

Sponsoring Entity
International Business Machines Corporation

Optical Monitoring of Vehicle Interiors  
Patent #
US 20070262574A1
Filed 01/04/2007

Current Assignee
Intelligent Technologies International Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Intelligent Technologies International Inc.

Document categorization and evaluation via crossentrophy  
Patent #
US 6,397,205 B1
Filed 11/22/1999

Current Assignee
Duquesne University of The Holy Ghost

Sponsoring Entity
Duquesne University of The Holy Ghost

Computeraided image analysis  
Patent #
US 6,996,549 B2
Filed 01/23/2002

Current Assignee
Health Discovery Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
James Roberts, SIMPSON K. RUSSELL, OHAYER TIMOTHY P., Memorial Health Systems Incorporated, Joe Mckenzie, Garry L. Carls, Glynn Bergeron, John E. Matthews, Curtis Anderson, Peter J. Farley, Jules B. Paderewski, Julian N. Stern

Geometric pattern matching using dynamic feature combinations  
Patent #
US 20060039601A1
Filed 01/10/2005

Current Assignee
National Instruments Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
National Instruments Corporation

Automatic document classification using text and images  
Patent #
US 7,039,856 B2
Filed 09/30/1998

Current Assignee
Ricoh Company Limited

Sponsoring Entity
Ricoh Company Limited

Methods and apparatus for transmitting signals through network elements for classification  
Patent #
US 20060112035A1
Filed 09/30/2004

Current Assignee
Google LLC

Sponsoring Entity
Google LLC

Convexification method of training neural networks and estimating regression models  
Patent #
US 7,082,420 B2
Filed 07/13/2002

Current Assignee
James TingHo Lo

Sponsoring Entity
James TingHo Lo

Computeraided image analysis  
Patent #
US 20060224539A1
Filed 02/06/2006

Current Assignee
Health Discovery Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
James Roberts, SIMPSON K. RUSSELL, OHAYER TIMOTHY P., Memorial Health Systems Incorporated, Joe Mckenzie, Garry L. Carls, Glynn Bergeron, John E. Matthews, Curtis Anderson, Peter J. Farley, Jules B. Paderewski, Julian N. Stern

Highorder entropy error functions for neural classifiers  
Patent #
US 20050015251A1
Filed 05/08/2001

Current Assignee
Intel Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Intel Corporation

Camera metadata for content categorization  
Patent #
US 6,977,679 B2
Filed 04/03/2001

Current Assignee
HewlettPackard Development Company L.P.

Sponsoring Entity
HewlettPackard Development Company L.P.

Method and apparatus for fast machine training  
Patent #
US 6,697,769 B1
Filed 01/21/2000

Current Assignee
Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC

Sponsoring Entity
Microsoft Corporation

Method and apparatus for image processing by generating probability distribution of images  
Patent #
US 6,704,454 B1
Filed 06/08/2000

Current Assignee
SRI International Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Sarnoff Corporation

Fractal production of darwinian objects  
Patent #
US 6,738,513 B1
Filed 10/30/2000

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

System and method of automatic object classification by tournament strategy  
Patent #
US 20030023575A1
Filed 12/27/2001

Current Assignee
MICROSPEC TECHNOLOGIES INC.

Sponsoring Entity
MICROSPEC TECHNOLOGIES INC.

3D localization of clustered microcalcifications using craniocaudal and mediolateral oblique view  
Patent #
US 6,614,921 B1
Filed 04/20/2000

Current Assignee
National Science Council

Sponsoring Entity
National Science Council

Computer system and process for training of analytical models using large data sets  
Patent #
US 6,347,310 B1
Filed 05/11/1998

Current Assignee
International Business Machines Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
Ascential Systems Inc.

Camera metadata for content categorization  
Patent #
US 20020140843A1
Filed 04/03/2001

Current Assignee
HewlettPackard Development Company L.P.

Sponsoring Entity
HewlettPackard Development Company L.P.

Computeraided image analysis  
Patent #
US 20020165837A1
Filed 01/23/2002

Current Assignee
Health Discovery Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
James Roberts, SIMPSON K. RUSSELL, OHAYER TIMOTHY P., Memorial Health Systems Incorporated, Joe Mckenzie, Garry L. Carls, Glynn Bergeron, John E. Matthews, Curtis Anderson, Peter J. Farley, Jules B. Paderewski, Julian N. Stern

Process for predrying textile filaments after wet treatment and device for practicing this method  
Patent #
US 20020182792A1
Filed 07/12/2002

Current Assignee
Superba

Sponsoring Entity
Superba

AUTOMATIC DOCUMENT CLASSIFICATION USING TEXT AND IMAGES  
Patent #
US 20010042085A1
Filed 09/30/1998

Current Assignee
Ricoh Company Limited

Sponsoring Entity
Ricoh Company Limited

METHODS FOR OBJECTBASED IDENTIFICATION, SORTING AND RANKING OF TARGET DETECTIONS AND APPARATUSES THEREOF  
Patent #
US 20120070033A1
Filed 01/28/2011

Current Assignee
GEOSPATIAL TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATES LLC

Sponsoring Entity
GEOSPATIAL TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATES LLC

Automatic image analysis and quantification for fluorescence in situ hybridization  
Patent #
US 8,391,575 B2
Filed 08/29/2011

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Automatic image analysis and quantification for fluorescence in situ hybridization  
Patent #
US 8,542,899 B2
Filed 02/26/2013

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Context driven image mining to generate imagebased biomarkers  
Patent #
US 8,594,410 B2
Filed 01/18/2011

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

Methods for objectbased identification, sorting and ranking of target detections and apparatuses thereof  
Patent #
US 8,897,489 B2
Filed 01/28/2011

Current Assignee
GEOSPATIAL TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATES LLC

Sponsoring Entity
Rochester Institute of Technology

Optical monitoring of vehicle interiors  
Patent #
US 8,948,442 B2
Filed 01/04/2007

Current Assignee
Intelligent Technologies International Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Intelligent Technologies International Inc.

Context driven image mining to generate imagebased biomarkers  
Patent #
US 9,245,337 B2
Filed 10/30/2013

Current Assignee
Definiens AG

Sponsoring Entity
Definiens AG

SHARP DISCREPANCY LEARNING  
Patent #
US 20160180214A1
Filed 12/19/2014

Current Assignee
Google LLC

Sponsoring Entity
Google LLC

DEVICES, METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR BIOMETRIC USER RECOGNITION UTILIZING NEURAL NETWORKS  
Patent #
US 20160335512A1
Filed 05/09/2016

Current Assignee
Magic Leap Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Magic Leap Inc.

System and method for detecting objects in an image  
Patent #
US 9,754,163 B2
Filed 11/07/2016

Current Assignee
Photomyne Ltd.

Sponsoring Entity
Photomyne Ltd.

Systems and methods for nearcrash determination  
Patent #
US 9,928,432 B1
Filed 09/14/2017

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Global Limited

System and method for detecting objects in an image  
Patent #
US 9,928,418 B2
Filed 08/12/2017

Current Assignee
Photomyne Ltd.

Sponsoring Entity
Photomyne Ltd.

System and method for image analysis  
Patent #
US 10,037,471 B2
Filed 07/05/2017

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

System and method for automatic driver identification  
Patent #
US 10,133,942 B2
Filed 07/05/2017

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

System and method for detecting objects in an image  
Patent #
US 10,198,629 B2
Filed 03/18/2018

Current Assignee
Photomyne Ltd.

Sponsoring Entity
Photomyne Ltd.

System and method for precision localization and mapping  
Patent #
US 10,209,081 B2
Filed 08/09/2017

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

System and method for precision localization and mapping  
Patent #
US 10,215,571 B2
Filed 02/15/2018

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

System and method for driver distraction determination  
Patent #
US 10,246,014 B2
Filed 11/07/2017

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

Structure learning in convolutional neural networks  
Patent #
US 10,255,529 B2
Filed 03/13/2017

Current Assignee
Magic Leap Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Magic Leap Inc.

Systems and methods for nearcrash determination  
Patent #
US 10,268,909 B2
Filed 02/09/2018

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

Devices, methods and systems for biometric user recognition utilizing neural networks  
Patent #
US 10,275,902 B2
Filed 05/09/2016

Current Assignee
Magic Leap Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Magic Leap Inc.

System and method for contextualized vehicle operation determination  
Patent #
US 10,430,695 B2
Filed 06/18/2018

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

System and method for detecting objects in an image  
Patent #
US 10,452,905 B2
Filed 01/28/2019

Current Assignee
Photomyne Ltd.

Sponsoring Entity
Photomyne Ltd.

System and method for determining probability that a vehicle driver is associated with a driver identifier  
Patent #
US 10,503,990 B2
Filed 10/15/2018

Current Assignee
Nauto Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Nauto Inc.

Systems and methods for articulated pose estimation  
Patent #
US 10,535,155 B2
Filed 10/24/2017

Current Assignee
Carnegie Mellon University

Sponsoring Entity
Toyota Motor Engineering Manufacturing North America Incorporated

Image noise reduction system using a wiener variant filter in a pyramid image representation  
Patent #
US 5,729,631 A
Filed 05/15/1995

Current Assignee
Intellectual Ventures I LLC

Sponsoring Entity
Polaroid Corporation

Method and system for the detection of microcalcifications in digital mammograms  
Patent #
US 5,491,627 A
Filed 05/13/1993

Current Assignee
ARCH Development Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
ARCH Development Corporation

Automated, noninvasive iris recognition system and method  
Patent #
US 5,572,596 A
Filed 09/02/1994

Current Assignee
Sensar Inc.

Sponsoring Entity
Sarnoff Corporation

Selforganizing neural network for classifying pattern signatures with `a posteriori` conditional class probability  
Patent #
US 5,384,895 A
Filed 08/28/1992

Current Assignee
The United States of America As Represented By The Secretary of Agriculture

Sponsoring Entity
The United States of America As Represented By The Secretary of Agriculture

Method for unsupervised neural network classification with back propagation  
Patent #
US 5,444,796 A
Filed 10/18/1993

Current Assignee
Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Incorporated

Sponsoring Entity
Miles Inc.

Method and system for differential diagnosis based on clinical and radiological information using artificial neural networks  
Patent #
US 5,463,548 A
Filed 04/28/1993

Current Assignee
ARCH Development Corporation

Sponsoring Entity
ARCH Development Corporation

Neural network learning system inferring an inputoutput relationship from a set of given input and output samples  
Patent #
US 5,479,576 A
Filed 02/23/1995

Current Assignee
Sumio Watanabe, Kenji Fukumizu

Sponsoring Entity
Sumio Watanabe, Kenji Fukumizu

Device for detecting cancerous and precancerous conditions in a breast  
Patent #
US 5,301,681 A
Filed 09/27/1991

Current Assignee
David M. Tumey, David B. Mcquain, Abdou F. Deban, Jonathon W. Reeves, Carole C. Reeves, Elias D. Aboujaoude, William H. Reeves

Sponsoring Entity
David M. Tumey, David B. Mcquain, Abdou F. Deban, Jonathon W. Reeves, Carole C. Reeves, Elias D. Aboujaoude, William H. Reeves

Application of neural networks as an aid in medical diagnosis and general anomaly detection  
Patent #
US 5,331,550 A
Filed 02/11/1993

Current Assignee
Direct Radiography Corp.

Sponsoring Entity
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company

Radar apparatus using neural network for azimuth and elevation detection  
Patent #
US 5,345,539 A
Filed 01/12/1993

Current Assignee
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE IN HER BRITTANIC MAJESTYS GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND THE

Sponsoring Entity
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEFENCE IN HER BRITTANIC MAJESTYS GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND THE

Near realtime stereo vision system  
Patent #
US 5,179,441 A
Filed 12/18/1991

Current Assignee
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THE AS REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS SPACE ADMINISTRATION NASA

Sponsoring Entity
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THE AS REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS SPACE ADMINISTRATION NASA

Dynamically stable associative learning neural system with one fixed weight  
Patent #
US 5,222,195 A
Filed 04/06/1992

Current Assignee
ERIM INTERNATIONAL INC.

Sponsoring Entity
Government of the United States of America, Environmental Research Institute of Michigan

Method and apparatus for diagnosis of breast tumors  
Patent #
US 5,260,871 A
Filed 07/31/1991

Current Assignee
Mayo Foundation For Medical Education And Research

Sponsoring Entity
Mayo Foundation For Medical Education And Research

Clustered neural networks  
Patent #
US 5,155,801 A
Filed 10/09/1990

Current Assignee
Raytheon Company

Sponsoring Entity
Hughes Aircraft Company

Neural network with back propagation controlled through an output confidence measure  
Patent #
US 5,052,043 A
Filed 05/07/1990

Current Assignee
Eastman Kodak Company

Sponsoring Entity
Eastman Kodak Company

Optical character recognition neural network system for machineprinted characters  
Patent #
US 5,048,097 A
Filed 02/02/1990

Current Assignee
Eastman Kodak Company

Sponsoring Entity
Eastman Kodak Company

19 Claims
 1. A method for growing a pattern tree having a root and at least one child, said method comprising the steps of:
(a) training the root of the pattern tree; (b) training the children of the pattern tree; and (c) creating at least one integration network, where said integration network receives its input from at least one of the children and root.  View Dependent Claims (2, 3, 4, 5)
 6. A pattern tree architecture of neural networks comprising:
a root feature network; at least one child feature network coupled to said root feature network; and at least one integration network, where said integration network receives its input from at least one of said children and root feature networks.  View Dependent Claims (7)
 8. A method for training a neural network to discover features, said method comprising the step of:
(a) providing the neural network with a plurality of training data; and (b) training the neural network using a function;
##EQU33## , where E_{FD} is an error function, where y(x) is an output of a position x, N is a total number of pixels, n_{o} is a number of pixels inside of an object, u is an integration variable and X_{pos} is a set of all positive positions. View Dependent Claims (9, 10)
 11. A method for training a neural network to detect objects with imprecise positions, said method comprising the step of:
(a) providing the neural network with a plurality of training data; and (b) training the neural network using a function;
##EQU37## , where E_{DL} is an error function, y(x) is an output of a position x, positives are positive regions and negatives are negative regions.
 12. A method for training a neural network, said method comprising the step of:
(a) providing the neural network with a plurality of the training data; and (b) training the neural network using a function that accounts for errors in said training data, wherein said function is;
##EQU38##
 13. A method for training a neural network, said method comprising the step of:
 (a) providing the neural network with a plurality of the training data; and
(b) training the neural network using a function that accounts for errors in said training data, wherein said function is;
##EQU39##
 (a) providing the neural network with a plurality of the training data; and
 14. A method for addressing a neural network trained with training data that contains error, said method comprising the step of:
 (a) providing the neural network with a plurality of the training data that contains error; and
(b) correcting an output of the neural network using a corrected probability.  View Dependent Claims (15, 16)
 (a) providing the neural network with a plurality of the training data that contains error; and
 17. A method for generating an integrated feature pyramid, said method comprising the steps of:
(a) generating a pyramid having a plurality of scales for each sample of an input signal; (b) applying oriented filtering to each of said plurality of scales of said pyramid to produce a plurality of oriented output signals; (c) squaring each of said plurality of oriented output signals to produce a squared output signal; and (d) generating a pyramid having a plurality of scales for each of said squared output signal.  View Dependent Claims (18, 19)
1 Specification
This invention was made with U.S. Government support under contracts nos. N00014930202 and F4962092C0072. The Government has certain rights in this invention.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/01,434 filed Feb. 9, 1996.
The present invention relates generally to the field of neural information processing and, more particularly, to a hierarchical apparatus and concomitant method for learning and integrating features from multiple resolutions for detecting and/or classifying objects. The present method and apparatus also address supervised learning where there are potential errors in the training data.
Neural network modeling has been developed to solve problems ranging from natural language understanding to visual processing. A neural network is a computational model composed of neurons (also known as nodes, units or perceptrons) and connections between the nodes. The strength of each connection is expressed by a numerical value called a weight, which can be modified. The activation of a given node is based on the activations of the nodes that have connections directed at that node and the weights on those connections.
In contrast to conventional computers, which are programmed to perform specific tasks, most neural networks do not follow rigidly programmed rules and are generally taught or trained. Generally, feedforward neural network can be implemented as functions y(f,w) of a vector f of inputs and a weight or parameter vector w. The weight vector is modified such that the neural network optimally estimates some quantity that depends on f. The process of adjusting w is commonly referred to as training, where the methods for training are referred to as training algorithms. Most neural network trainings involve the use of an error function. The weight vector is adjusted so as to minimize the sum of average of the error function on a set of training samples. A penalty term is generally applied to the error to restrict the weight vector in some manner that is thought desirable. Given the resulting objective function, various training methods are used to minimized it or involve the use of some form of gradient descent.
For instance, in image analysis a digital photographic image can be introduced to a neural network for identification, and it will active the relevant nodes for producing the correct answer based on its training. Connections between individual nodes are "strengthened" (resistance turned down) when a task is performed correctly and "weakened" (resistance turned up) if performed incorrectly. In this manner a neural network is trained and provides more accurate output with each repetition of a task.
The field of image analysis is wellsuited for computerassisted search using neural network. Generally, images contain a vast quantity of information where only a small fraction of the information is relevant to a given task. The process of identifying the relevant fraction from the vast quantity of information often challenges the capabilities of powerful computers. Although neural networks have demonstrated its flexibility as patternrecognition apparatus for detecting relevant information from images, they scale poorly with the size of the images. As the size of the image and neural network increases, the computational expense and training time may become prohibitive for many applications.
For example, radiologists are faced with the difficult task of analyzing large quantities of mammograms to detect subtle cues of breast cancer which may include the detection of microcalcifications. A difficult problem is the detection of small target objects in large images. The problem is challenging because searching a large image is computationally expensive and small targets on the order of a few pixels in size have relatively few distinctive features which enable them to be identified from "nontargets".
A second problem is the need for using real data (training samples) to train a neural network to detect and classify objects. Such real data will almost inevitably contain errors, thereby distorting the conditional probability that an input vector came from an instance of the class that a neural network is designed to detect or from a specific position on the image.
Therefore, a need exists in the art for a method and apparatus for automatically learning and integrating features from multiple resolutions for detecting and/or classifying objects. Additionally, a need exists in the art for a supervised learning method that addresses errors in the training data.
A signal processing apparatus and concomitant method for learning and integrating features from multiple resolutions for detecting and/or classifying objects are presented. Neural networks in a pattern tree structure/architecture with treestructured descriptions of objects in terms of simple subpatterns, are grown and trained to detect and integrate the subpatterns. The method grows the pattern tree from the root to the leaves, and integrates the outputs of the neural networks to produce an overall estimate of the probability that an object of interest is present. A specific treemirror pattern tree structure having feature networks and integration networks is used to improve feature detection.
A plurality of objective functions and their approximations are also presented to train the neural networks to detect subpatterns of features of some class of objects. Objective functions for training neural networks to detect objects whose positions in the training data are uncertain and for addressing supervised learning where there are potential errors in the training data are also presented.
The teachings of the present invention can be readily understood by considering the following detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:
FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a signal processing system that incorporates a neural network that embodies the teachings of the present invention;
FIG. 2 illustrates a pattern tree for describing objects in terms of simple subpatterns;
FIG. 3 illustrates a method for learning pattern trees;
FIG. 4 illustrates a pattern tree with a "treemirroring" structure;
FIG. 5 illustrates the general processing blocks of a typical CAD system for microcalcificaton detection;
FIG. 6 illustrates a conventional hierarchical pyramid/neural network (HPNN);
FIG. 7 illustrates an apparatus for generating an "integrated feature pyramid" (IFP) for providing inputs to a neural network;
FIG. 8 illustrates a second embodiment of an apparatus for generating an "integrated feature pyramid" (IFP); and
FIG. 9 illustrates the method of applying a hierarchical pyramid/neural network architecture to the problem of finding microcalcifications in mammograms.
FIG. 1 depicts a signal processing system 100 that utilizes the present inventions. The signal processing system consists of a signal receiving section 130, a signal processing section 110 and input/output devices 120.
Signal receiving section 130 serves to receive input data signals, such as images from, including by nut limited to, aerial imagery or medical imaging devices. Signal receiving section 130 includes a data receiving section 132 and a data storage section 134. Data receiving section 130 may include a number of devices such as a modem and an analogtodigital converter. A modem is a wellknown device that comprises a modulator and a demodulator for sending and receiving binary data over a telephone line, while an analogtodigital converter converts analog signals into a digital form. Hence, signal receiving section 130 may receive input signals "online" and, if necessary, convert them to a digital form from a number of devices such as a computer, a camera, a video player/decoder or various imaging devices, e.g., medical devices. In fact, the input signals is not limited to images and may comprise any data that has a "natural scale", e.g., drug discovery data (molecular data in general) and speech data.
The data storage section 134 serves to store input signals received by data receiving section 132. Data storage section 134 may incorporate a number of devices such as a disk drive, semiconductor memory or other storage media. These storage devices provide a method for applying a delay to the input signals or to simply store the input signals for subsequent processing.
In the preferred embodiment, the signal processing section 110 comprises a general purpose computer having at least one neural network 112, at least one central processing unit (CPU) 114 and a memory 116 for processing images. The neural network 112 can be a physical device constructed from various filters and/or processors which is coupled to the CPU through a communication channel. Alternatively, the neural network can be represented by a software implementation residing in the memory of the signal processing section.
The signal processing section 110 is also coupled to a plurality of input and output devices 120 such as a keyboard, a mouse, a video monitor or storage devices, including but not limited to, a hard disk drive, a floppy drive or a compact disk drive. The input devices serve to provide inputs (e.g., data, commands and software applications) to the signal processing section for processing the input images, while the output devices serve to display or record the results.
Each neural network 112 includes at least an input layer, an output layer and optional intermediate layers (also known as hidden layers). Each layer includes at least one node. The neural network undergoes supervised training in accordance with the methods described below. The trained neural network is then applied to an input image for detecting and/or classifying a target object.
The CPU 114 of the signal processing section performs various signal processing functions, including but not limited to, preprocessing the input images (e.g., constructing an image pyramid for each input image), training the neural network, processing the output signal from the neural network and growing pattern trees as discussed below.
The present invention addresses the poor scaling property of a neural network by applying the well known concept of "pattern trees" which are treestructured descriptions of objects in terms of simple subpatterns as illustrated in FIG. 2. Each node of the tree is a small template which matches some piece of the object at some resolution. Levels (210 . . . 220) in the pattern tree represent resolution, typically equivalent to pyramid level, with the root or top node 230 matching the overall appearance of the desired object at the lowest usable resolution 210. The top node'"'"'s children 240 represent the appearance of pieces of the object, where these children'"'"'s children represent subpieces of the pieces, and so on.
In the present invention, by attempting to detect subpatterns rather than the entire object, the detection of the object is divided into simpler tasks. Namely, combining the patterntree approach with neural networks creates a method of detecting relatively complex objects by using collections of simple networks. Generally, there are subpatterns for each of several scales, so that multiresolution techniques such as coarsetofine search can be used to search for objects. In addition, matches can be verified or falsified based on subsets of the entire pattern tree, potentially improving efficiency. Partially occluded objects can be recognized by matches of parts of their pattern tree, even if matches to the largerscale parts are poor. For example, searching for camouflaged objects can be accomplished by looking for appropriate matches to the finescale features first.
Specifically, the present invention trains several neural networks to detect different features, incrementally integrating these features using other networks, with a final network producing the overall estimate of the probability for an object of interest (OOI). Namely, the pattern tree grows from the root to the leaves and integrates the outputs of the networks to produce an overall estimate of the probability that an object of interest is present.
A principled objective function is also used to train the individual neural networks to detect subpatterns or features of some class of objects. The present invention learns the subpattern, rather than being informed as to what is the pattern, its location, in which examples of the objects it occurs, or even the probability of it occurring in an object. Each featuredetection network learns a pattern which is most useful for distinguishing this class of objects from other objects, although the pattern does not have to appear in every example of the object of interest. The objective function of the present invention differs significantly from the traditional neural network error functions, which are designed to measure how likely the network is to reproduce the training data.
FIG. 3 illustrates a method 300 for learning pattern trees. Namely, FIG. 3 illustrates a method for training and determining the structure/architecture a plurality of neural networks to detect a feature or subfeature which is useful for distinguishing between objects of the desired class from other objects without having to specify the feature, i.e., each neural network "discovers" the feature during training. A pattern tree will typically have its root node represent the overall appearance of the object at low resolution, e.g., a pattern tree for faces might have a root node that represents small faceshaped blobs.
Referring to FIG. 3, the method begins in step 310 and proceeds to step 320 where the method trains the root of the pattern tree. The training of a neural network to detect such patterns is similar to the usual procedure for training a neural network to detect objects in an image. It may be undesirable to try to force the neural network to respond at all positions within the objects at lowresolution, and it may be difficult or at least tedious to specify exactly which pixels are contained in the objects. In one embodiment, the error function for training the root node is the uncertainobjectposition objective of equation 9 as discussed below. In a second embodiment, for learning the appearance of different poses of the object, the "Feature Discovery" objective of equation 2 below can be used so that one neural network would not have to learn all poses. However, other appropriate error functions can be used to train the root node.
All networks in the present invention are used in the same way, where the network is applied to each pixel in an image or region of an image, one pixel at a time. The inputs to the network are features derived from the image at that location. These features may be chosen features, such as oriented energies in some frequency bands, or they may have been derived by another network.
In step 330, the method 300 trains the children nodes. Each of the neural networks is trained with different random starting weight vectors. The neural networks are trained in all of each region occupied by an object, or they may be trained in some region defined by the output of the network in the parent node. These trainings serve to promote the child networks in learning subfeatures of the parent'"'"'s feature.
In one embodiment, there is nothing to encourage the child networks to learn the subfeatures. Since the goal is to have the child networks learn subfeatures of the parent'"'"'s features, the method simply provides the child networks with the parent network'"'"'s output or the outputs of its hidden units, suitably upsampled since the parent'"'"'s pattern is at a lower resolution. This would at least provide the child networks with information about the coarserscale feature.
In another embodiment, some region in the image would be defined by locating all pixels at which the parent network'"'"'s output is above some threshold. This region is expanded slightly, since the parent node may respond only in a restricted region of some feature. This expansion permits the children to learn subfeatures of the entire parent feature.
It is desirable for the network to learn to detect some feature which is maximally helpful for distinguishing objects of this class from other objects. The network will be trained on all examples of the object and on negative examples. However, it is not desirable to insist that the feature occurs in all examples of the object, but if it never occurs, the feature is very uninformative. Thus, the present invention trains the neural networks using an objective function called "FeatureDiscovery" which prefers features which occur fairly frequently in the examples of the class, but does not punish the network too much for examples in which the feature does not occur.
More specifically, the probability that a pixel is in an object from the class of interest is maximized, if the network generates a detection at that pixel. Unlike the conventional case, the probability of being in an object given a detection is not determined by the training data. Instead, a distribution for it from the training data is computed and the mean value of this distribution is used as our performance criterion.
Let the output of the network at position x by y(x). Denote the symbol o (o) that an object is (is not) present at whatever pixel that are currently being considered. Denote by d (d) that the network has (has not) detected a pattern at the current pixel. The probability of being in an object from the class of interest given a detection is Pr (o\d), which can be referred to as p_{o}\d. For a given parameter vector, set of input images, and knowledge of the locations of the objects in the image, the sets of network outputs Y_{Pos} on the positive positions and Y_{Neg} on the negative positions can be computer. The probability distribution for P_{o}\d can be marginalized over the number of detections n_{od} in positive examples of the desired object class and the number of detections n_{od} in negative examples. Thus, the expected value of p_{o}\d is: ##EQU1## The expression in equation 1 can be evaluated exactly since the factors in each term in the sum are welldefined, given a prior for p_{o}\d. Thus, equation 1 is computed with respect to the network'"'"'s parameters to produce the expression: ##EQU2## where N is the total number of pixels, n_{o} is the number of pixels inside of the object. (The bar here indicates the mean and not negations as above.) The negative logarithm of equation 2 is the FeatureDiscovery (FD) objective function (E_{FD}). Typically, in training a neural network, the weights are adjusted to minimize the negative logarithm of a probability, rather than maximizing the probability directly. However, those skilled in the art will realize that given a probability, neural network training can be implemented in different manners.
The gradient of p_{o}\d with respect to a weight w_{a} is: ##EQU3##
However, solving equation 2 is computationally expensive. Alternatively, if n_{od} >>1, a good approximation should be p_{o}\d ≈n_{od} /n_{d}, the number of detections in objects divided by the total number of detections. By using the mean values of n_{od} and n_{d} and applying offsets a, b to both numerator and denominator, where a=2n_{0} /N and b=2, an approximation to p_{o}\d is achieved. The negative logarithm of this approximation is used as the "Approximate FeatureDiscovery" (AFD) objective function: ##EQU4## Even though equation 4 is derived from an exact expression of p_{o}\d, that exact expression was derived using a choice of prior, so the terms 2n_{0} N and 2 are not the only possibilities. For the purpose of training, the gradient of equation 4 with respect to the network parameters is: ##EQU5##
Because these objective functions use the number of pixels detected in the positive regions and in total, the network is rewarded for detecting more than one pixel within an object.
Alternatively, it would be preferable if the neural network was rewarded for detecting pixels in different objects. To achieve this result, the detection of pixels is replaced with the detection of regions. For the negative pixels, those parts of the image whose size is typical of the objects being detected are divided into "blobs". In a coarsetofine search system, at resolutions other than the lowest, negative regions are defined by the detections of the network at the nextlowerresolution. If these regions are large, it may be useful to divide them into smaller regions.
The probability of detecting a region is just the probability of detecting at least one pixel within the region. This is one minus the probability of not detecting any of the pixels, or z_{i} =1Π_{x}εBlob.sbsb.i (1y(x)). Thus, the blobwise AFD objective is ##EQU6## where n_{pb} is the number of positive blobs in the training data and N_{b} is the total number of blobs in the training data. The gradient of equation 6 with respect to a weight is: ##EQU7##
The initial number of children to train for a given node in the tree is approximately 10. This number can be altered by pruning out those networks which are redundant or perform poorly.
Thus, method 300 learns the pattern tree by first training the root and then training children of the root at the nexthigher resolution. For each child, the method then trains children for it, and so on at successively higher resolutions, until the method has found subfeatures at the highest resolution available.
In step 340, method 300 integrates feature detection into object detection. Method 300 creates or grows a pattern tree having a particular "treemirroring" structure as illustrated in FIG. 4. Referring to FIG. 4, the treemirroring structure contains "feature" (F) networks 412, 422, 424, 432, 434 and 436, which have already been trained to detect subpatterns of the objects. The treemirroring structure also contains integration networks (I) 414 and 426, which have the outputs of other networks for their inputs. For each feature network with children, a single corresponding or "mirror" integration network is added which receives inputs from the children of its mirror feature network and also input from that mirror feature network. It should be noted that, at most, only one integration network is added to each level or resolution as shown in FIG. 4. For example, integration neural network 426 receives inputs from feature neural networks 422, 432 and 434.
However, if a feature network has children which themselves have children, i.e., which are not leaves of the tree, then this feature network'"'"'s mirror integration network will be given input from the child feature networks'"'"' mirror integration networks, rather than from the feature networks themselves. For example, integration neural network 414 receives inputs from feature neural networks 424, 436 and integration network 426.
The integration network is trained to detect information resembling the part of the object corresponding to the feature of that part'"'"'s appearance being detected by the mirror feature network. Unlike the mirror feature network, the integration network contains relevant finerscale information about the subfeature it detects, namely the subfeatures of this subfeature. Thus, the integration network is a more reliable detector than the mirror feature network of the same subfeature. In the preferred embodiment, the training for both the integration network and feature network is the same.
This method of adding integration networks at successively higher resolutions is repeated up to the root node. The mirror integration network 414 of the root node is a network whose output is an estimate of the probability that an OOI is present. Thus the outputs of the feature nets are incrementally combined to produce this probability estimate.
Alternatively, since each feature network and its corresponding mirror integration network have outputs representing the same type of information, the child feature network'"'"'s outputs can be directly applied as inputs to a separate integration network, rather than their mirror integration nets'"'"' outputs. In this manner, the method determines the probability that an OOI is present without having to apply the entire tree. This probability can be used to decide whether to accept this example as a positive, a negative, or to continue applying the tree. Once the feature detection is integrated into object detection, method 300 ends in step 350.
However, those skilled in the art will realize that method 300 can be modified in many ways to produce similar results. For example, some geometric information can be introduced by having the integration networks receive input from a small window in the images of their outputs. Alternatively, it might also be useful to provide a child network with an upsampled window of the outputs of its parent, so it can determine where it lies relative to its parent feature. Another alternative is to apply competitive learning in training the networks to promote different children of a node to learn different patterns.
Thus, an "Feature Discovery" objective function and its gradient have been presented which allows a neural network or other parameterized function to be trained for detecting features of a set of objects which best discriminate the objects of this class from other parts of the images. Alternatively, accurate approximations of the objective function can be used to train the neural networks to reduce the computational expense. These equations express an estimate of the probability p_{o}\d that a pixel is in an object of the class of interest if the network generates a detection at that pixel.
Since the neural networks are trained with the FD or AFD objectives, the networks generally detect features which tend to be present in the objects of interest. One modification of the present invention is to incorporate features which tend not to be present in these objects. Thus, it is possible to train some neural networks on the complementary error function or to have a single error function which gives both kinds of features, favoring whichever kind is most useful. Furthermore, the FD or AFD objective functions can be used to train neural networks that are not assembled into a pattern tree.
A very common problem in supervised learning is the presence of errors in the training data. First, when training a network to detect objects in images, the positions of the objects in the training data may not be accurately specified or the objects may not even have definite positions. The second kind of errors are wrong classifications of examples for detection or classification problems. For example, a human may introduce errors into the training data by incorrectly selecting the positions of the desired objects or incorrectly classifying the objects, i.e., objects were incorrectly chosen as positive or negative examples.
Furthermore, extended objects may have definite boundaries, yet frequently it is not desirable to train the network to respond to all points within the objects'"'"' boundaries. Specific points within each object could be chosen as the points at which the network must respond, but frequently it will not be clear which points to choose. Thus, even though the objects'"'"' positions are well defined, the desired output of the network may not be. For objects without preciselydefined positions, it is desirable to train a neural network so that its output goes high somewhere within the object, without specifying precisely where. The present invention provides objective functions for training a network to detect objects whose positions and classifications in the training data are uncertain.
Most error functions, including the conventional crossentropy objective function, are valid only if the positions of the objects are precisely specified. Specifically, the crossentropy error function is expressed as:
E=Σ[d.sub.i log (y(f.sub.i))+(1d.sub.i) log (1y(f.sub.i))](8)
where the network'"'"'s output for a given input vector is y, and with probability y it is decided that the example is a positive, i.e., came from an object that the neural network wishes to find. The probability of producing the correct output for a given feature vector f is y^{d} (f)(1y(f))^{1d} (for brevity, the dependence of y on the network'"'"'s weights will be suppressed throughout the discussion), where value dε{0,1} corresponds to the correct output for the example. The probability of reproducing the training set is the product of this over all examples. However, if the positions of the objects in the training images are imprecise, the training data contains examples for which the desired output d is unknown.
For the situation in which the exact positions of the objects are unknown, a "Detection Likelihood" (DL) objective function is presented which measures the probability of detecting all of the positives and none of the negative objects in the training data, if a positive is considered to be detected when at least one detection occurs within a certain region containing the given coordinates. In one embodiment, the DL objective function is used to train the root of the pattern tree in step 320 of FIG. 3. The only conditions of the application of this DL objective function is that the true positions of the objects in the training data are within a known distance of the given positions.
The DL objective function maximizes the probability of detecting the positives, i.e., of producing at least one detection within each positive region, and producing no detections elsewhere. Thus, for each positive object a small region must be chosen in which a detection by the neural network will be acceptable.
This objective function treats a detection at a point as a detection of all objects which have that point in their positive region. This is beneficial since missing such points could result in missing all of the overlapping objects. Searching at coarse resolution frequently encounters overlapping objects. Thus, detecting several objects by detecting a point is beneficial for the coarsetofine search approach as discussed above.
The probability of the neural network producing at least one detection in a positive region is expressed as one minus the probability of producing no detection in the region, or 1Π_{x}εPositive (1y(x)). The probability of making a correct decision, i.e., no detection, at a negative position x is 1y(x). The probability of detecting all of the positives and no negative points is the product of 1Π_{x}εPositive (1y(x)) over all positives times the product of 1y(x) over all known negatives. Thus, the DL error function is: ##EQU8##
The gradient of E_{DL} with respect to the network weights is: ##EQU9##
Equations 9 and 10 are likely to be numerically wellbehaved. However, during the early stages of training it is not uncommon for the network output at all positions in a positive region to be numerically zero, i.e., zero to the machine'"'"'precision. If the network'"'"'s output unit has a sigmoidal activation function, the resulting singularity is avoided by rewriting the expressions in terms of the output unit'"'"'s activation a.
Using 1y=1/(1+e^{a}) and partial expansion of the product 1+e^{a}, it can be shown that: ##EQU10## For each object, the sum and product can be accumulated in a loop over positions in the positive region. The singularity occurs if all y are nearly zero, i.e., if all a are negative and large in magnitude. In this case, one of the e^{a} '"'"'s is factored out and a maximum chosen for it, thus accumulating (dropping the x'"'"'s, since the indices are adequate labels): ##EQU11## If a new a^{Max} is found, and it is still large in magnitude and negative, the current sum is multiplied by e^{a}.spsb.OldMax_{a}.spsb.NewMax. At the end of the loop this positive regions'"'"'s contribution to the error is: ##EQU12## During the loop over positions, a position whose a is negative but relatively small or positive may be encountered. The factor e^{a}.spsb.OldMax_{a}.spsb.NewMax could be extremely small, so that equation 13 becomes inappropriate. In such case, modification of equation 11 with a partial sum and product up to the (k1)th term produces: ##EQU13## where it is used to switch to accumulating the product of 1y(x_{i}). This can be expressed in terms of the partial sum up to the (k1)th term as: ##EQU14## where a_{k}^{Max} is the maximum activation among the first k points in the object. The derivative of the error in a positive region can be expressed as: ##EQU15## if all of the a'"'"'s are large and negative, and otherwise as in equation 10. Several sums and products are typically accumulated during the loop over positions in a positive region in order to evaluate equation 16.
For the sum over positives in equation 10, there is one sum and one product to accumulate. The product Π_{i} (1y_{i}) is already being accumulated for the error. Because of the properties of the sigmoidal function, the sum is equal to Σ_{j}≦i y_{j} ∂a_{j} /∂w_{a} which must be accumulated for equation 16 anyway. Thus, it is easy to switch from equation 16 to equation 10 if not all of the activities are negative and large.
Therefore, a DL objective function for training neural networks to find objects with uncertain training object positions is disclosed. Although the DL objective function is applied to the training of the root node of the pattern tree in FIG. 3, it s application is not so limited. The DL objective function can be used to train neural networks that are not assembled into a pattern tree.
The present invention also contains objective functions for handling errors in the training data for the detection learning task and the multiclass discrimination learning task, using maximumlikelihood criteria. For the detection learning task, the error function is: ##EQU16## where y(x_{i}) is the output of the network for the ith input vector x_{i}, d_{i} ε{0,1} is the "Uncertain Desired Output" (UDO) for the ith example, i.e., 0 indicates the example was considered to be a negative example of the class of interest, whereas 1 indicates it was considered to be a positive example of the class of interest, and π_{d} is the probability that the example truly belongs to the class of interest given that the udo is d. π_{d} can be thought of as a function with argument d from the twoelement set {0,1} to the interval [0,1].OR right.R. Thus, π_{d} has two values, π_{0} and π_{1}.
The Uncertain Desired Output (UDO) error function (equation 17) is derived from the generalization that the goal of training is to produce the weights which are maximally likely to produce the correct outputs, rather than the specified desired outputs. For a single example, the probability of producing the correct output is the probability of this example being a positive given the specified desired output times the probability that it will be randomly decided as a positive given the network'"'"'s output, plus the probability that the example is a negative example given the specified desired output times the probability that it will be randomly decided as a negative given the network'"'"'s output. This is:
P(correctforexample{x,d})=π.sub.d y(x)+(1π.sub.d)(1y(x))(18)
The probability that the correct decisions about membership in class A is made for the training data given the network'"'"'s outputs on each of these examples is: ##EQU17## As usual, it is convenient to train by minimizing the negative logarithm of equation 19, which provides the UDO error function of equation 17. It should be noted that if π_{d} is not zero for either value of d, the UDO error function does not have the numerical problems of the crossentropy error function (equation 8) when the network output saturates at zero or one.
For training neural networks, the gradient of the error with respect to the network weights is extremely useful. For the UDO error function, this is: ##EQU18## Again, if neither π_{d} is zero, no special treatment is necessary. If one of the two π_{d} '"'"'s is zero, then the network output may saturate at the wrong value, as with the conventional crossentropy error function.
For the multiclass discrimination, if there are errors in the classifications in the training set, the error function is: ##EQU19## where p_{c} (x) is the same as for a softmax network, as discussed below. π_{c},d is the probability that an example truly belongs to class c if the uncertain desired class in the training data is d. π_{c},d can be thought of as a function with arguments c,d from the set {1, . . . , N_{c}}×{ 1, . . . , N_{c} } to the interval [0,1].OR right.R, where N_{c} is the number of classes.
The "UDOsoftmax" error function (equation 21) is derived from the generalization of the Bridle'"'"'s softmax error which generalizes the crossentropy error function to the case with multiple classes. However, there is a difference, since treating the twoclass case with softmax would require a network with two outputs. With N_{C} classes, there are N_{C} outputs y_{c}, cε{1, . . . , N_{C} }. The network'"'"'s estimate of the probability of the example being in class c is ##EQU20## The probability of choosing the correct class for an example, given the (assumed correct) desired classification d, is
P(correct)=p.sub.d (x) (23)
The error function is again minus the logarithm of the product over all examples of the probability in equation 23, which gives: ##EQU21##
If there are errors in the desired classes in the data set, and the probability π_{c},d of an example belonging to class c given only its desired class d is estimated, then the probability of correctly classifying an example is: ##EQU22## The probability of correctly classifying all of the training examples is: ##EQU23## Taking the negative logarithm of equation 26 gives the "UDOsoftmax" error function of equation 21.
Again, the gradient of the error with respect to the network weights is extremely useful for training neural networks. For the UDOsoftmax error function, this is: ##EQU24##
Note that if there are no errors in the desired classifications given in the training set, π_{c},d =δ_{c},d, so that equation 26 reduces to equation 24, and equation 27 reduces to the usual softmax formula ∂e_{i} /∂y_{c} =p_{c} (x_{i})δ_{c},d.sbsb.i where ∂e_{i} /∂y_{c} is the derivative of the error on the ith example e_{i}.
Therefore, a "UDO" objective function and a "UDOsoftmax" objective function for handling errors in the training data for the detection learning task and the multiclass discrimination learning task are disclosed. Again, although these objective functions can be applied to the training of the root node of the pattern tree in FIG. 3, it'"'"'s application is not so limited. These objective functions can be used to train neural networks that are not assembled into a pattern tree.
alternatively, it is also possible to address errors in the training data for the detection learning task and the multiclass discrimination learning task by training the network with the conventional crossentropy (equation 8) or softmax error function (equation 22). Namely, the network is trained on the training data, complete with its errors, and then the outputs are adjusted for the error probability while using the network. The network'"'"'s output continues to be interpreted as a probability, but it is the probability that the example would have been given a particular uncertain desired output if it was in the training data. Thus, the alternative embodiments correct for the expected probability of error in order to estimate the probability that the example truly comes from the class of interest.
For the detection task, the corrected probability that the example with input vector x belongs to the class of interest is:
P(c=1x)=π.sub.1 y(x)+π.sub.0 (1y(x)) (28)
Equation 28 is derived by estimating P(c=1x) which is not the underlying true probability that the example is a positive given the input, but rather it is the probability with which the example should be accepted as a positive, given the knowledge of the probability that an expert would determine it as a positive. After training, the network computes the probability P(d1x) that an expert would determine that an example with feature vector x is a positive. P(c=1x) can be computed from P(d=1x) and the π_{d} '"'"'s. Expressing P(c=1x) as a sum over probabilities with different values of d:
P(c=1x)=P(c=1, d=1x)+P(c=1, d=0x)(29)
Factor the P(c,d\x) into P(c\d)P(d\x) (this is valid because of the interpretation of P(c=1x), as discussed above). This gives:
P(c=1x)=P(c=1d1)P(d=1x)+P(c=1d=0)P(d=0x) (30)
Replace P(c=1d) with π_{d} and P(d=0x) with 1P(d=1x) to get:
P(c=1x)=π.sub.1 P(d=1x)+π.sub.0 (1P(d=1x)) (31)
Thus, if the neural network'"'"'s output for the input x is y(x), then the output should be transformed to the corrected probability of equation 28 as discussed above in order to get the best estimate for P(c=1x) given the available information.
For the multipleclass task, the corrected probability that the example with input vector x has the true class c given the network outputs is: ##EQU25##
Here, the network has N_{C} outputs, one for each class. Using Bridle'"'"'s softmax function to compute the probabilities of an example belonging to each class from the network outputs and following the above derivation, the probability of an example with input x belonging to class c can be written as: ##EQU26## where C is the random variable describing which class the instance belongs to, of which cε{, . . . , N_{C} } is a sample, and D is the random variable describing which class the instance would be assigned to in the desired outputs, of which is dε{1, . . . N_{C} } a sample. Factor the P(C=c,D=d\x) into P(C=c\D=d)P(D=d\x) to get: ##EQU27## In order to get the best estimate of P(C=c\x) given the available information, the corrected probability of equation 32 is used, where y_{d} (x) is the output of the network for class d, after training the network on the desired outputs with errors. Thus, a method for adjusting the outputs of a neural network for the error probability while the network is trained with conventional objective functions (crossentropy and softmax) is disclosed.
However, the method for correcting the output of a network that was conventionallytrained with errors in the desired outputs does not give the maximumlikelihood estimate of the conditional probability, and it is not equivalent to choosing the maximumlikelihood estimate for the network'"'"'s weights. Namely, the conditional probability produced by the these two different methods are not the same. Generally, the UDO error functions are numerically betterbehaved than the "corrected" crossentropy or softmax error functions. The UDO error functions could also be more robust in the presence of the errors. For example, it might tend to ignore errors that are clustered in a particular part of input space.
However, both methods may produce similar results and the performance of each method may depend on the specific application. Since there is a general preference in the community for maximumlikelihood kinds of arguments, the UDO error functions are generally preferred.
Thus, objective functions have been presented for training networks to detect objects in images when the objects'"'"' positions are not accurately specified in the training data. Furthermore, other objective were derived for detection and classification problems when the training data is known to have false examples.
The present invention can be employed to exploit contextual information for improving assisted search and automatic target recognition (ATR). Problems analogous to assisted search and ATR exist in the medical imaging community. For example, radiologists will search for microcalcifications in mammograms for early detection of breast cancer. These microcalcifications are small (less than 5 millimeters) and difficult to detect, and contextual information (e.g., clustering of calcifications, location relative to anatomical structure, etc.) can prove useful for improving detection. A method and apparatus for applying the DL objective function for training neural networks in a hierarchical neural network architecture to detect microcalcifications in mammograms is disclosed.
FIG. 5 illustrates the general processing blocks of a typical CAD system 500 for microcalcification detection with a neural network detector/classifier. The system contains a preprocessing section 520, a feature extraction and rulebased/heuristic analysis section 520 and a statistical/neural network (NN) classifier 540.
First, the system receives a digital/digitized mammogram 510, where the preprocessing section 520 segments the breast area and increases the overall signaltonoise levels in the image. At this early state, regions of interest (ROIs) are defined representing local areas of the breast which potentially contain a cluster of calcifications.
Next, the feature extraction and rulebased/heuristic analysis section 530 applies thresholds and clustering criteria to the extracted features, given prior knowledge of how calcification clusters typically appear in the breast, in order to prune false positives.
Finally, the remaining ROIs are processed by a statistical classifier or neural network, which has been trained to discriminate between positive and negative ROIs. The advantage of having a neural network as the last stage of the processing is that a complicated and highly nonlinear discrimination function can be constructed which might otherwise not be easily expressed as a rulebased algorithm.
However, some CAD systems may produce a high number of false positives which is unacceptable by radiologists. An important goal has therefore been to establish methods for reducing false positive rates without sacrificing sensitivity.
FIG. 6 illustrates a conventional hierarchical pyramid/neural network (HPNN) 600 for detecting individual microcalcifications. The input to the HPNN are features at two different levels 620 and 622 of an image pyramid (levels 2 and 3, with level 0 being fullresolution) with the outputs, p(T), representing the probability that a target is present at a given location in the image. The HPNN comprises two neural networks 610 and 612. Neural network 612 processes data from level 3 features while neural network 610 processes data from level 2. Furthermore, in this architecture, information is propagated hierarchically, with the outputs of the hidden units (not shown) of the neural network 612 serving as inputs to the neural network 610.
FIG. 7 illustrates an apparatus 700 for generating an "integrated feature pyramid" (IFP) from an input image which is provided as input to neural networks 710 and 712. The IFP contains features constructed at several scales, allowing the neural networks to take advantage of coarsetofine search and to operate on only a small region of the entire image.
The features in the IFP are sorted, oriented "energies" at several image scales 720724. Namely, a Gaussian pyramid generator 705 constructs a Gaussian pyramid having several image scales 720724 of a sample of an input signal, e.g., an input image (a mammogram, a photograph, video frame and etc.). In turn, a filter section 730 applies (4) oriented highpass filtering to each image of the pyramid. The pixel values in these images 735 are then squared by a squaring section 740 to get the energies. This ensures that when the resolution is reduced by lowpass filtering, the resulting image features are present. Orientationinvariant features are constructed via sorter 750 by sorting the energy images by their magnitude at each pixel location. The resulting features are useful because the relative size of the minimum energy compared with the maximum energy indicates the degree to which the local image detail is oriented. Finally, another Gaussian pyramid generator 760 generates Gaussian pyramids of these feature images, with a neural network 710 integrating the features across a given level and a neural network 712 integrating the features across a different level and so on.
The neural networks in FIG. 6 and 7 are multilayer perceptrons, having one hidden layer with four hidden units. All units in a network perform a weighted sum of their inputs, subtracting an offset or threshold from that sum to get the activation: ##EQU28##
This activation is transformed into a unit'"'"'s output, y, by passing it through the sigmoid function: ##EQU29##
The networks are trained using the crossentropy error function of equation 8. where dε{0,1} is the desired output. To obtain the objective function for the optimization routine, the total error is computed on the training examples, adding to it a regularization term: ##EQU30## This type of regularization is commonly referred to as "weight decay", and is used to prevent the neural network from becoming "overtrained." λ was adjusted to minimize the crossvalidation error. Crossvalidation error was computed by dividing the training data into a number of separate disjoint subsets, whose union is the entire set. The network was first trained on all of the training data, and then, starting from this set of weights, the network was retrained on the data with one of the subsets left out. The resulting network was tested on the "holdout" subset. This retraining and testing with a holdout set was repeated for each of the subsets, and the average of the errors on the subsets in the crossvalidation error, an unbiased estimate of the average error on new data.
The HPNN receives as input a single pixel from the same location in each of the feature images at the resolution being searched. The HPNN also receives hierarchical contextual input (i.e. output of the hidden units of the level 3 net are inputs to the level 2 net). The output of the HPNN is an estimate of the probability that a microcalcification is present at a given position, conditioned on its input. In applying the HPNN to the task of microcalcification detection, findings indicate that certain hidden units appear to represent information about the location of ducts, implying that the HPNN utilizes context to increase microcalcification detection accuracy.
FIG. 8 illustrates another embodiment of an apparatus 800 for generating an "integrated feature pyramid" (IFP) which can be incorporated into existing microcalcificaton detection CAD system as shown in FIG. 5 for reducing false positive regions of interest (ROIs). In this embodiment, the IFP is used as inputs to a HPNN architecture that incorporates a four level hierarchy (levels 0 to 3) as opposed to the two levels used in the HPNN of FIG. 7. Namely, the input to the HPNN are features at four different levels of an image pyramid. In turn, the HPNN comprises four neural networks 810, 812, 814 and 816, where neural network 816 processes data from level 3 features with the outputs of its hidden units (not shown) serving as inputs to the neural network 814 and so on in a hierarchical manner.
In addition, the IFP is constructed differently. Before constructing the integrated feature pyramid, a background trend correction technique is applied to all the ROIs. Namely, steerable filters 830 were used to compute local orientation energy. The steering properties of these filters enable the direct computation of the orientation having maximum energy. At each pixel location, features which represent the maximum energy (energy at θ_{max}), the energy at the orientation perpendicular to θ_{max} (θ_{max} 90°), and the energy at the diagonal (energy at θ_{max} 45°) were constructed. In sum, the IFP generator of FIG. 8 replaces the oriented highpass filters 730 with steerable filters 830, thereby eliminating the need for the (sorter) 750 as shown in FIG. 7. In turn, Gaussian pyramid generator 860 construct pyramids for these features which are then fed into the network hierarchy as shown in FIG. 8.
Referring to FIG. 8, each network in the HPNN hierarchy receives 3(L+1) inputs from the integrated feature pyramid and 4 hidden unit inputs from the L1 network, with the exception of the level 3 network 816, which has no hidden unit inputs. However, the use of the IFP is not limited to the network architecture of the HPNN. In fact, the IFP can be used in conjunction with the pattern tree architecture as discussed above or other network architectures.
Since radiologists often make small errors in localizing the individual calcifications, the DL error function of equation 9 is used to train the neural networks for reducing false positives. These errors generally appear to be within ±2 pixels of the correct position.
The HPNN is applied to every pixel in the input, in raster scan, and a probability map is constructed from the output of the Level 0 network. This map represents the network'"'"'s estimate of the probability (continuous between 0.0 and 1.0) that a microcalcification is at a given pixel location. Training and testing was done using a jackknife protocol, whereby one half of the data is used for training and the other half for testing.
For a given ROI, the probability map produced by the network is thresholded at a given value (between 0.0 and 1) to produce a binary detection map. Region growing is used to count the number of distinct regions. If the number of regions is greater than or equal to a certain cluster criterion, then the ROI is classified as a positive, else it is classified a negative.
FIG. 9 illustrates the method 900 of applying a hierarchical pyramid/neural network architecture to the problem of finding microcalcifications in mammograms. The HPNN utilizes contextual and multiresolution information for reducing the false positive rates of an existing CAD system for microcalcification detection.
Referring to FIG. 9, method 900 begins in step 910 and proceeds to step 920 where the method constructs an integrated feature pyramid by decomposing the image by orientation and scale. As discussed above, the decomposition of the image by orientation can be accomplished by using oriented highpass filters or steerable filters. Once the image is decomposed, the method proceeds to step 930.
In step 930, the resulting features from the decomposed image is feed into an HPNN structure where the neural network integrate the features across a given level. Furthermore, outputs of hidden units from the neural network of a lower level is feed as inputs to the neural network of the next level and so on in a hierarchical fashion. FIG. 7 and 8 illustrate two specific HPNN structures with two and four levels. However, HPNN structures with other levels are also permitted and may produce similar results.
In step 940, the HPNN is trained using the DL error function of equation 9. This error function is particularly well suited for the detection of microcalcifications because their locations in a mammogram may not be accurately specified or may not have definite positions. Those skilled in the art will realize that the training step of 940 does not have to follow step 930. In fact, the HPNN can be trained prior to receiving the IFP as inputs. Finally, the method ends in step 950.
Those skilled in the art will realize that the HPNN is not limited to the detection of microcalcifications in mammograms and can be applied to various applications such as analyzing aerial imagery. Furthermore, although the present invention is described with objects in images, those skilled in the art will realize that the present invention can be applied to events in a signal, i.e., detecting events in onedimensional signals, or specific conditions in signals with any number of dimensions greater than zero.
There has thus been shown and described a novel method and apparatus for learning and integrating features from multiple resolutions for detecting and/or classifying objects and for addressing supervised learning where there are potential errors in the training data. Many changes, modifications, variations and other uses and applications of the subject invention will, however, become apparent to those skilled in the art after considering this specification and the accompanying drawings which disclose the embodiments thereof. All such changes, modifications, variations and other uses and applications which do not depart from the spirit and scope of the invention are deemed to be covered by the invention, which is to be limited only by the claims which follow.