Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Jim Mutch

dblp:06/670 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-authorTheory of computation · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
4 papers
Image recognition and object detection · 46% Face, body and person analysis · 32% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 12%

Topics — the 10 heaviest of 11, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection › image classification
object classification
0.122008
Object Class Recognition and Localization Using Sparse Features with Limited Receptive Fields · Int. J. Comput. Vis. 2008
Multiclass Object Recognition with Sparse, Localized Features · CVPR (1) 2006
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis
face recognition
0.112011
Why The Brain Separates Face Recognition From Object Recognition · NIPS 2011
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
object recognition
0.112011
Why The Brain Separates Face Recognition From Object Recognition · NIPS 2011
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis › face recognition › robust face recognition
pose-invariant face recognition
0.112011
Why The Brain Separates Face Recognition From Object Recognition · NIPS 2011
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
object localization
0.112008
Object Class Recognition and Localization Using Sparse Features with Limited Receptive Fields · Int. J. Comput. Vis. 2008
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › bayesian inference › bayesian filtering
kalman filtering
0.012004
Diagnosis by a waiter and a Mars explorer · Proc. IEEE 2004
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods › sequential monte carlo
particle filtering
0.012004
Diagnosis by a waiter and a Mars explorer · Proc. IEEE 2004
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping
state estimation
0.012004
Diagnosis by a waiter and a Mars explorer · Proc. IEEE 2004
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping
mobile service robot
0.012004
Diagnosis by a waiter and a Mars explorer · Proc. IEEE 2004
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots › field robotics
planetary rover
0.012004
Diagnosis by a waiter and a Mars explorer · Proc. IEEE 2004

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

computational simulation · 0.1sparse features · 0.1limited receptive fields · 0.1max pooling · 0.1lateral inhibition · 0.1gabor filter · 0.1feature selection · 0.1particle filter · 0.0kalman filter · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 Unsupervised learning of invariant representations
Fabio Anselmi, Joel Z. Leibo, Lorenzo Rosasco, Jim Mutch, Andrea Tacchetti, Tomaso A. Poggio
Theor. Comput. Sci.4
2011 Why The Brain Separates Face Recognition From Object Recognition
abstract
Many studies have uncovered evidence that visual cortex contains specialized regions involved in processing faces but not other object classes. Recent electrophysiology studies of cells in several of these specialized regions revealed that at least some of these regions are organized in a hierarchical manner with viewpoint-specific cells projecting to downstream viewpoint-invariant identity-specific cells (Freiwald and Tsao 2010). A separate computational line of reasoning leads to the claim that some transformations of visual inputs that preserve viewed object identity are class-specific. In particular, the 2D images evoked by a face undergoing a 3D rotation are not produced by the same image transformation (2D) that would produce the images evoked by an object of another class undergoing the same 3D rotation. However, within the class of faces, knowledge of the image transformation evoked by 3D rotation can be reliably transferred from previously viewed faces to help identify a novel face at a new viewpoint. We show, through computational simulations, that an architecture which applies this method of gaining invariance to class-specific transformations is effective when restricted to faces and fails spectacularly when applied across object classes. We argue here that in order to accomplish viewpoint-invariant face identification from a single example view, visual cortex must separate the circuitry involved in discounting 3D rotations of faces from the generic circuitry involved in processing other objects. The resulting model of the ventral stream of visual cortex is consistent with the recent physiology results showing the hierarchical organization of the face processing network.
Joel Z. Leibo, Jim Mutch, Tomaso A. Poggio
NIPS2
2008 Object Class Recognition and Localization Using Sparse Features with Limited Receptive Fields
Jim Mutch, David G. Lowe
Int. J. Comput. Vis.1
2006 Multiclass Object Recognition with Sparse, Localized Features
abstract
We apply a biologically inspired model of visual object recognition to the multiclass object categorization problem. Our model modifies that of Serre, Wolf, and Poggio. As in that work, we first apply Gabor filters at all positions and scales; feature complexity and position/scale invariance are then built up by alternating template matching and max pooling operations. We refine the approach in several biologically plausible ways, using simple versions of sparsification and lateral inhibition. We demonstrate the value of retaining some position and scale information above the intermediate feature level. Using feature selection we arrive at a model that performs better with fewer features. Our final model is tested on the Caltech 101 object categories and the UIUC car localization task, in both cases achieving state-of-the-art performance. The results strengthen the case for using this class of model in computer vision.
Jim Mutch, David G. Lowe
CVPR (1)1
2004 Diagnosis by a waiter and a Mars explorer
abstract
This paper shows how state-of-the-art state estimation techniques can be used to provide efficient solutions to the difficult problem of real-time diagnosis in mobile robots. The power of the adopted estimation techniques resides in our ability to combine particle filters with classical algorithms, such as Kalman filters. We demonstrate these techniques in two scenarios: a mobile waiter robot and planetary rovers designed by NASA for Mars exploration.
Nando de Freitas, Richard Dearden, Frank Hutter, Rubén Morales-Menéndez, Jim Mutch, David Poole 0001
Proc. IEEE5