Abstract
In this paper, we propose a new philosophy different from that of the well-known Locality-Sensitive Hashing (LSH): if two data points are close, we wish that the probability for them to fall into the same hash buckets is high; whereas if two data points are far away, we do not care the probability of them falling into the same hash buckets. Our new philosophy is a relaxation of the LSH requirement, by ignoring the side effects of placing differently labeled data points into the same hash bucket. Based on such relaxation, a new hashing method, namely the Laplacian Hashing, is derived, which is natural to incorporate any kernel functions and “similar” / “dissimilar” weakly supervised information. Another contribution of this paper is that, it is the first time that a fast hashing method is applied for the midway processing in a cascaded face detection structure. Experimental results show that, our method is on average not worse than the state of the arts in terms of accuracy, but much faster and thus can handle much larger training datasets within reasonable computation time.








Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bentley J (1975) Multidimensional binary search trees used for associative searching. Commun ACM 18:509–517
Bronstein MM, Bronstein AM, Michel F, Paragios N (2010) Data fusion through cross-modality metric learning using similarity-sensitive hashing, CVPR, pp 3594–3601
Dong W, Wang Z, Josephson W, Charikar M, Li K (2008) Modeling LSH for performance tuning, Proc. CIKM, pp 669–678
Fan R, Chang K, Hsieh C, Wang X, Lin C (2008) LIBLINEAR: a library for large linear classification. J Mach Learn Res 9:1871–1874
Gionis A, Indyk P, Motwani R (1999) Similarity search in high dimensions via hashing, Proc. International conference on very large data bases, pp 518–529
He J, Chang S, Radhakrishnan R, Bauer C (2011) Compact hashing with joint optimization of search accuracy and time, Proc. CVPR, pp 753–760
He J, Liu W, Chang S (2010) Scalable similarity search with optimized kernel hashing, Proc. SIGKDD, pp 1129–1138
He X, Niyogi P (2003) Locality preserving projections, Proc. NIPS, pp 153–160
Huang Y, Long Y (2006) Super-resolution using neural networks based on the optimal recovery theory. J Comput Electron 5(4):275–281
Jain P, Kulis B, Grauman K (2008) Fast image search for learned metrics, CVPR, pp 1–8
Joly A, Buisson O (2011) Random maximum margin hashing, Proc. CVPR, pp 873–880
Korman S, Avidan S (2011) Coherency sensitive hashing, Proc. ICCV, pp 1607–1614
Kulis B, Darrell T (2009) Learning to hash with binary reconstructive embeddings, Proc. NIPS, pp 1042–1050
Kulis B, Grauman K (2009) Kernelized locality-sensitive hashing for scalable image search, Proc. ICCV, pp 2130–2137
Li P, Wang M, Cheng J, Xu C, Lu H (2013) Spectral hashing with semantically consistent graph for image indexing. IEEE Trans Multimed 15(1):141–152
Liu W, Wang J, Kumar S, Chang SF (2011) Hashing with graphs, Proc. ICML, pp 1–8
Long Y, Huang Y (2006) Image based source camera identification using demosaicking. Proceedings of IEEE 8th Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing, Victoria, Canada, pp 419–424
Lv Q, Josephson W, Wang Z, Charikar M, Li K (2007) Multi-probe LSH: Efficient indexing for high-dimensional similarity search, Proc. International conference on very large data bases, pp 950–961
Mu Y, Shen J, Yan S (2010) Weakly-supervised hashing in kernel space, Proc. CVPR, pp 3344–3351
Norouzi M, Fleet DJ (2011) Minimal loss hashing for compact binary codes, Proc. ICML, pp 353–360
Raginsky M, Lazebnik S (2009) Locality-sensitive binary codes from shift-invariant kernels, Proc. NIPS, pp 1509–1517
Salakhutdinov R, Hinton G (2009) Semantic hashing. Int J Approx Reason 50(7):969–978
Shakhnarovich G, Viola P, Darrell T (2003) Fast pose estimation with parameter-sensitive hashing, Proc. ICCV, pp 750–757
Shi J, Malik J (1997) Normalized cuts and image segmentation, Proc. CVPR, pp 731–737
Springer J, Xin X, Li Z, Watt J, Katsaggelos A (2013) Forest hashing: Expediting large scale image retrieval. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, pp 1681–1684
Torralba A, Fergus R, Weiss Y (2008) Small codes and large databases for recognition, Proc. CVPR, pp 1–8
Viola P, Jones M (2001) Rapid object detection using a boosted cascade of simple features. Proceedings of IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 1: 511–518
Wang J, Kumar S, Chang SF (2010) Semi-supervised hashing for scalable image retrieval, Proc. CVPR, pp 3424–3431
Wang J, Kumar S, Chang SF (2010) Sequential projection learning for hashing with compact codes, Proc. ICML, pp 1127–1134
Weiss Y, Torralba A, Fergus R (2009) Spectral hashing, Proc. NIPS, pp 1753–1760
Xu H, Wang J, Li Z, Zeng G, Li S, Yu N (2011) Complementary hashing for approximate nearest neighbor search, Proc. ICCV, pp 1631–1638
Zhang D, Wang J, Cai D, Lu J (2010) Self-taught hashing for fast similarity search, Proc. SIGIR, pp 18–25
Zhang D, Wang J, Cai D, Lu J (2010) Laplacian co-hashing of terms and documents, Proc. European conference on information retrieval research, pp 577–580
Zhu J, Cai C (2012) Real-time face detection using Gentle AdaBoost algorithm and nesting cascade structure. Proceedings of IEEE international symposium on intelligent signal processing and communications systems, pp 33–37
Acknowledgments
This research work is funded by Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.11176016, 60872117), and Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education (Grant No. 20123108110014).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Here we outline the proof to show that, even when d = 2, the problem of balanced graph partitioning is a sub-problem of minimizing Eq. (2) subject to Eq. (3).
Equation (3) is a binarization step, thresholding the largest and smallest halves of the n scalars a T x i + b (1 ≤ i ≤ n) to be 1 and −1 respectively. This leads to the fact that, the value of sgn(a T x i + b) is just determined by the relative rank of a T x i + b among a T x 1 + b, a T x 2 + b…, a T x n + b: if a T x i + b ranks among the largest n/2 data points, sgn(a T x i + b) = 1, otherwise sgn(a T x i + b) = −1.
Obviously, each value assignment of the n binary hash codes sgn(a T x i + b) (1 ≤ i ≤ n) uniquely corresponds to an equal partition (P1,P2). Here an equal partition (P1,P2) is defined as P1∩P2 = ∅, P1∪P2 = {1,2,…n} and |P1| = |P2|. It is easy to find a relative rank a T x σ1 + b < a T x σ2 + b < … < a T x σn + b, such that P1 = {σ 1,σ 2…σ n/2}, P2 = {σ n/2+1,σ n/2+2…σ n }.
We now verify that, the support vector a always exists to generate any given relative rank a T x σ1 + b < a T x σ2 + b < … < a T x σn + b. For any two data points x i and x j , the support vector a t perpendicular to the line connecting x i and x j is the thresholding support vector such that, the projection of x i and x j onto a t is identical and a t T x i + b = a t T x j + b. All support vectors a within the half-plane at the clockwise direction of a t satisfy a T x i + b > a T x j + b; and vice versa. Thus by adjusting the angle of the support vector, we can arbitrarily choose a T x i + b > a T x j + b or a T x i + b < a T x j + b for any data point pairs x i and x j .
Therefore we see that, the support vector a always exists to generate any given value assignment of the n binary hash codes, or equivalently, any given equal partition (P1,P2). On the other side, whatever the support vector a is, only sgn(a T x i + b) (1 ≤ i ≤ n) finally affects the objective function E(a) in Eq. (2), so all support vectors leading to a specific value assignment of sgn(a T x i + b) (1 ≤ i ≤ n) can be regarded as being “represented” by such value assignment. Based on these two sides, we can conclude that, working on the vector a in Eq. (2) as the variable is equivalent to working on the n binary hash codes sgn(a T x i + b) (1 ≤ i ≤ n) (i.e. n binary bits) as variable.
Consider an undirected graph whose vertices are the n data points and the weight between point i and j is w ij . The equal partition (P1,P2) partitions the graph into two equal parts, P1 and P2. Now E(a) becomes the weight sum of the edges cut by the partition: E(a) = cut(P1,P2). Hence minimizing Eq. (2) subject to Eq. (3) is equivalent to minimizing cut(P1,P2) subject to |P1| = |P2| which is known to be NP hard [24].
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huang, Y., Guan, Y. Laplacian hashing for fast large-scale image retrieval and its applications for midway processing in a cascaded face detection structure. Multimed Tools Appl 75, 16315–16332 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-2932-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-2932-7