and achievable quality. At test time, we select a working
point on the Pareto front, represented by the
Ni	
values, based either on the number of proposals Npwe
can handle or on the minimum achievable quality our
8
application needs, and we combine the Nitop proposals
from each hierarchy list.
Formally, assuming Rranked lists Li, an exhaustive
learning algorithm would consider all possible values
of theR-tuplefN1;:::;NRg, whereNi2f0;:::;jLijg;
adding up toQR
1jLijparameterizations to try, which is
intractable in our setting.
Figure 7 illustrates the learning process. To reduce the
dimensionality of the search space, we start by selecting
two ranked lists L1,L2(green curves) and we sample
the list atSlevels of number of proposals (green dots).
We then scan the full S2different parameterizations to
combine the proposals from both (blue dots). In other
words, we analyze the sets of proposals created by
combining the top N1fromL1(green dots) and the top
N2fromL2.
1011021031040.30.60.9
Number of proposalsQuality
1011021031040.30.60.9
Number of proposalsQuality
We propose a unified approach for bottom-up hierarchical image segmentation
and object proposal generation for recognition, called Multiscale Combinatorial
Grouping (MCG). For this purpose, we first develop a fast normalized cuts
algorithm. We then propose a high-performance hierarchical segmenter that makes
effective use of multiscale information. Finally, we propose a grouping
strategy that combines our multiscale regions into highly-accurate object
proposals by exploring efficiently their combinatorial space. We also present
Single-scale Combinatorial Grouping (SCG), a faster version of MCG that
produces competitive proposals in under five second per image. We conduct an
extensive and comprehensive empirical validation on the BSDS500, SegVOC12, SBD,
and COCO datasets, showing that MCG produces state-of-the-art contours,
hierarchical regions, and object proposals.
Jordi Pont-Tuset Pablo Arbelaez Jonathan T. Barron Ferran Marques Jitendra Malik