Zoom out Search Issue

IEEE SIGNAL PROCESSING MAGAZINE [159] MARCH 2015
EXAMPLE 5
We employed LWCA for classification based on common and dis-
tinct features of natural objects from the ETH-80 database (http://
www.d2.mpi-inf.mpg.de/Data sets/ETH80) whereby the discrimi-
nation among objects was performed using only the common fea-
tures. This data set consists of 3,280 images in eight categories,
each containing ten objects with 41 views per object. For each cat-
egory, the training data were organized in two distinct fourth-
order
()I128 128 3
4
### tensors, where . ,I p10 4105
4
##=
where p denotes the fraction of training data. LMWCA was applied
to these two tensors to find the common and individual features,
with the number of common features set to 80% of
.I
4
In this
way, eight sets of common features were obtained for each cat-
egory. The test sample label was assigned to the category whose
common features matched the new sample best (evaluated by
canonical correlations) [110]. Figure 16 compares LMWCA with
the standard K-nearest neighbors (K-NNs) and LDA classifiers
(using 50 principal components as features), all averaged over 50
Monte Carlo runs. The enhanced classification results for LMWCA
are attributed to the fact that the classification makes use of only
the common components and is not hindered by components that
are not shared across objects or views.
SOFTWARE
The currently available software resources for tensor decompo-
sitions include:
The tensor toolbox, a versatile framework for basic opera-
tions on sparse and dense tensors, including CPD and Tucker
formats [111].
The TDALAB and TENSORBOX, which provide a user-
friendly interface and advanced algorithms for CPD, nonneg-
ative TKD, and MWCA [112], [113].
The Tensorlab toolbox builds upon the complex optimiza-
tion framework and offers numerical algorithms for comput-
ing the CPD, BTD, and TKD; the toolbox includes a library of
constraints (e.g., nonnegativity and orthogonality) and the
possibility to combine and jointly factorize dense, sparse, and
incomplete tensors [89].
PredictionTrainingData Acquisition
(c)(b)(a)
Motion Capture Tensorization
Marker
ECoG
Layout
1
2
3
4
65
8
91011
14 13 12
15161718
21 20 19
222324
27 26 25
282930
32 31
7
Ch1
Ch2
Ch3
Ch32
. . .
...
...
ECoG Recordings
05
Time (s)
Tensorization
Time
Frequency
Channel
Tensor (Regressions)
HOPLS
Model
Parameters
Marker
Time
X(t )
Y(t )
Z(t )
Tensor (Limb Trajectories)
Time
Frequency
Channel
Data Tensor
from New Recordings
Predictor
20 40 60
Time (s)
80 100
20 40 60
Time (s)
80 100
20 40 60
Time (s)
80 100
6
Trajectory
4
2
0
1
0
–1
–2
–3
2
1
0
–1
X-PositionY-PositionZ-Position
Prediction of 3-D Hand Trajectory
HOPLS PLS
Coordinates
[FIG14] The prediction of arm movement from brain electrical responses. (a) The experiment setup. (b) The construction of the
data and response tensors and training. (c) The new data tensor (bottom) and the predicted 3-D arm movement trajectories
,,(XYZ coordinates) obtained by tensor-based HOPLS and standard matrix-based PLS (top).
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
q
q
M
M
q
q
M
M
q
M
THE WORLD’S NEWSSTAND
®
Previous Page | Contents | Zoom in | Zoom out | Front Cover | Search Issue | Next Page
q
q
M
M
q
q
M
M
q
M
THE WORLD’S NEWSSTAND
®
___