How do we know that we solved vision?

16-721: Learning-Based Methods in VisionA. Efros, CMU, Spring 2009

Columbia Object Image Library (COIL-100) (1996) 

Corel Dataset

Yu & Shi, 2004

Average Caltech categories (Torralba)

{ }all photos

Flickr.com

Flickr Paris

Real Paris

Automated Data Collection

Kang, Efros, Hebert, Kanade, 2009

Something More Objective?

Middlebury Stereo Dataset

Famous Tsukuba Image

Issue 1

• We might be testing too soon…

• Need to evaluate the entire system:– Give it enough data– Ground it in the physical world– Allow it to affect / manipulate its environment

• Do we need to solve Hard AI?– Maybe not. We don’t need Human Vision per

se – how about Rat Vision?

Issue 2

• We might be looking for “magic” where none exist…

Valentino Braitenberg, VehiclesSource Material: http://www.bcp.psych.ualberta.ca/~mike/Pearl_Street/Margin/Vehicles/index.html

Introduces a series of (hypothetical) simple robots that seem,to the outside observer, to exhibit complex behavior.

The complex behavior does not come from a complex brain, but from a simple agent interacting with a rich environment.

Vehicle 1: Getting aroundA single sensor is attached to a single motor.Propulsion of the motor is proportional to the signaldetected by the sensor.The vehicle will always move in a straight line,slowing down in the cold, speeding up in the warm.

Braitenberg: “Imagine, now, what you would think if you saw such a vehicle swimming around in a pond. It is restless, you would say, and does not like warm water. But it is quite stupid, since it is not able to turn back to the nice cold sport it overshot in its restless ness. Anyway, you would say, it is ALIVE, since you have never seen a particle of dead matter move around quite like that.”

More complex vehicles

Moral of the Story

• “Law of Uphill Analysis and Downhill Invention: machines are easy to understand if you’re creating them; much harder to understand ‘from the outside’.

• Psychological consequence: if we don’t know the internal structure of a machine, we tend to overestimate its complexity.”

Turing Tests for Vision

• Your thoughts…

Have we solved vision if we solve all the boundary cases?

Varum

Computer Vision Database Zhaoyin Jia

Object segmentation/recognitionDetailed segmented/labeled, all the scenes in life.

Semantic meaning in image/videoHuman understanding of the image/story behind the image

Feeling/reaction after understanding

During the Spring break

Before the deadline

Failed in 16721

Best project in 16721

Love

Kiss

In the class

CuteAdorableSafe

More threatenedRun fasterNeed more help

ThreatenedRunCall for help

How do we know that we solved vision?

General Rule: Turing test If CVS == HVS in Training & Performance & Speed & Failure case Then We declare vision is solved. Beers and Being laid off.

Verifiable Specific Rules:Challenges in Training Full-automatic object Discovery & Categorization from unlabeled, long video sequence. Multi-view robust real-time Recognition of ten of thousands of objects, given few trainings of each object.Challenges in Performance Pixel-wise Localization and Registration in cluttered and degraded scene; Long-term real-time robust Tracking for generic objects in cluttered and degraded video sequence.Human failure – human vision illusion Able to explain human vision illusions, and Reproduce them.

Conclusion:Good luck for all!

Yuandong Tian

16-721: Learning-based method in vision

Turing Test for Vision

• From the blog:– No overall test. Vision is task-dependent. Do one

problem at a time.– Use Computer Graphics to generate tons of test data– A well-executed Grand Challenge

• Genre Classification in Video– The Ultimate Dataset (25-year-old grad student)– Need to handle corner cases / illusions. “Dynamic

range of difficulty”. – It’s all about committees, independent evaluations,

and releasing source code– It’s hopeless…