Fig. 4. Example of segmentation projection . In order to
“snap” the boundaries of a segmentation R(left) to those
of a segmentation S(middle), since they do not align, we
compute(R;S)(right) by assigning to each segment in
Sits mode among the labels of R.
the smallest keigenvectors of the ﬁnal “downsampled” matrix Adby using a standard sparse eigensolver
ncuts (Ad;k), and repeatedly “upsamples” those eigenvectors. Because our Ais not bistochastic and decimation
is not an orthonormal operation, we must do some
normalization throughout the algorithm (line 5) and
whiten the resulting eigenvectors (line 10). We found that
values ofd= 2 ord= 3 worked well in practice. Larger
values ofdyielded little speed improvement (as much of
the cost is spent downsampling A0) and start negatively
affecting accuracy. Our technique is similar to Nystrom’s
method for computing the eigenvectors of a subset of A,
but our squaring-and-decimation procedure means that
we do not depend on long-range connections between
pixels.
3.2 Aligning Segmentation Hierarchies
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