Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3571600.3571603acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicvgipConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Interpreting Intrinsic Image Decomposition using Concept Activations

Published: 12 May 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Evaluation of ill-posed problems like Intrinsic Image Decomposition (IID) is challenging. IID involves decomposing an image into its constituent illumination-invariant Reflectance (R) and albedo-invariant Shading (S) components. Contemporary IID methods use Deep Learning models and require large datasets for training. The evaluation of IID is carried out on either synthetic Ground Truth images or sparsely annotated natural images. A scene can be split into reflectance and shading in multiple, valid ways. Comparison with one specific decomposition in the ground-truth images used by current IID evaluation metrics like LMSE, MSE, DSSIM, WHDR, SAW AP%, etc., is inadequate. Measuring R-S disentanglement is a better way to evaluate the quality of IID. Inspired by ML interpretability methods, we propose Concept Sensitivity Metrics (CSM) that directly measure disentanglement using sensitivity to relevant concepts. Activation vectors for albedo invariance and illumination invariance concepts are used for the IID problem. We evaluate and interpret three recent IID methods on our synthetic benchmark of controlled albedo and illumination invariance sets. We also compare our disentanglement score with existing IID evaluation metrics on both natural and synthetic scenes and report our observations. Our code and data are publicly available for reproducibility 1.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary pdf (supplementary.pdf)
MP4 File (real_world_results.mp4)
Supplementary pdf, demonstrative results videos
MP4 File (synthetic_results.mp4)
synthetic dataset additional results
MP4 File (synthetic_results.mp4)
synthetic dataset additional results
MP4 File (synthetic_results.mp4)
synthetic dataset additional results

References

[1]
Neil Alldrin, Todd Zickler, and David Kriegman. 2008. Photometric stereo with non-parametric and spatially-varying reflectance. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[2]
David Alvarez Melis and Tommi Jaakkola. 2018. Towards robust interpretability with self-explaining neural networks. Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) (2018).
[3]
Jonathan T Barron and Jitendra Malik. 2013. Intrinsic scene properties from a single rgb-d image. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[4]
Anil S Baslamisli, Yang Liu, Sezer Karaoglu, and Theo Gevers. 2021. Physics-based shading reconstruction for intrinsic image decomposition. Computer Vision and Image Understanding 205 (2021), 103183.
[5]
Sean Bell, Kavita Bala, and Noah Snavely. 2014. Intrinsic images in the wild. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 33, 4 (2014), 1–12.
[6]
Nicolas Bonneel, Balazs Kovacs, Sylvain Paris, and Kavita Bala. 2017. Intrinsic decompositions for image editing. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 36. Wiley Online Library, 593–609.
[7]
Nicolas Bonneel, Balazs Kovacs, Sylvain Paris, and Kavita Bala. 2017. Intrinsic Decompositions for Image Editing. Computer Graphics Forum (Eurographics State of The Art Report) (2017).
[8]
Daniel J Butler, Jonas Wulff, Garrett B Stanley, and Michael J Black. 2012. A naturalistic open source movie for optical flow evaluation. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV). Springer.
[9]
Vladimir Bychkovsky, Sylvain Paris, Eric Chan, and Frédo Durand. 2011. Learning Photographic Global Tonal Adjustment with a Database of Input / Output Image Pairs. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[10]
M. Cimpoi, S. Maji, I. Kokkinos, S. Mohamed, and A. Vedaldi. 2014. Describing Textures in the Wild. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[11]
Blender Online Community. 2018. Blender - a 3D modelling and rendering package. Blender Foundation, Stichting Blender Foundation, Amsterdam. http://www.blender.org
[12]
Partha Das, Sezer Karaoglu, and Theo Gevers. 2022. PIE-Net: Photometric Invariant Edge Guided Network for Intrinsic Image Decomposition. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[13]
Sylvain Duchêne, Clement Riant, Gaurav Chaurasia, Jorge Lopez-Moreno, Pierre-Yves Laffont, Stefan Popov, Adrien Bousseau, and George Drettakis. 2015. Multi-view intrinsic images of outdoors scenes with an application to relighting. ACM Transactions on Graphics(2015), 16.
[14]
Qingnan Fan, Jiaolong Yang, Gang Hua, Baoquan Chen, and David Wipf. 2018. Revisiting deep intrinsic image decompositions. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[15]
Ruth C Fong and Andrea Vedaldi. 2017. Interpretable explanations of black boxes by meaningful perturbation. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 3429–3437.
[16]
Elena Garces, Adolfo Munoz, Jorge Lopez-Moreno, and Diego Gutierrez. 2012. Intrinsic images by clustering. In Computer graphics forum, Vol. 31. Wiley Online Library, 1415–1424.
[17]
Amirata Ghorbani, James Wexler, James Y. Zou, and Been Kim. 2019. Towards Automatic Concept-based Explanations. In Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS).
[18]
Tom Goldstein and Stanley Osher. 2009. The split Bregman method for L1-regularized problems. SIAM journal on imaging sciences 2, 2 (2009), 323–343.
[19]
Ian J Goodfellow, Jonathon Shlens, and Christian Szegedy. 2014. Explaining and harnessing adversarial examples. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6572(2014).
[20]
Roger Grosse, Micah K Johnson, Edward H Adelson, and William T Freeman. 2009. Ground truth dataset and baseline evaluations for intrinsic image algorithms. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE, 2335–2342.
[21]
Dmitry Kazhdan, Botty Dimanov, Mateja Jamnik, Pietro Liò, and Adrian Weller. 2020. Now you see me (CME): concept-based model extraction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.13233(2020).
[22]
Dmitry Kazhdan, Botty Dimanov, Helena Andres Terre, Mateja Jamnik, Pietro Liò, and Adrian Weller. 2021. Is disentanglement all you need? comparing concept-based & disentanglement approaches. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.06917(2021).
[23]
Been Kim, Martin Wattenberg, Justin Gilmer, Carrie Cai, James Wexler, Fernanda Viegas, 2018. Interpretability beyond feature attribution: Quantitative testing with concept activation vectors (tcav). In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML). PMLR.
[24]
Pang Wei Koh, Thao Nguyen, Yew Siang Tang, Stephen Mussmann, Emma Pierson, Been Kim, and Percy Liang. 2020. Concept bottleneck models. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 5338–5348.
[25]
Balazs Kovacs, Sean Bell, Noah Snavely, and Kavita Bala. 2017. Shading annotations in the wild. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 6998–7007.
[26]
Vivek Kwatra, Mei Han, and Shengyang Dai. 2012. Shadow removal for aerial imagery by information theoretic intrinsic image analysis. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Computational Photography (ICCP). IEEE, 1–8.
[27]
MCJJ L EH. 1971. Lightness and retinex theory. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, 1 (1971), 1–11.
[28]
Pierre-Yves Laffont, Adrien Bousseau, and George Drettakis. 2012. Rich intrinsic image decomposition of outdoor scenes from multiple views. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 19, 2(2012), 210–224.
[29]
Edwin H Land and John J McCann. 1971. Lightness and retinex theory. Josa 61, 1 (1971), 1–11.
[30]
Yu Li and Michael S Brown. 2014. Single image layer separation using relative smoothness. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[31]
Zhengqi Li and Noah Snavely. 2018. Cgintrinsics: Better intrinsic image decomposition through physically-based rendering. In European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV).
[32]
Zhengqi Li and Noah Snavely. 2018. Learning intrinsic image decomposition from watching the world. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[33]
Pantelis Linardatos, Vasilis Papastefanopoulos, and Sotiris B. Kotsiantis. 2021. Explainable AI: A Review of Machine Learning Interpretability Methods. Entropy 23(2021).
[34]
Xiaopei Liu, Liang Wan, Yingge Qu, Tien-Tsin Wong, Stephen Lin, Chi-Sing Leung, and Pheng-Ann Heng. 2008. Intrinsic colorization. In ACM SIGGRAPH Asia 2008 papers. 1–9.
[35]
Yunfei Liu, Yu Li, Shaodi You, and Feng Lu. 2020. Unsupervised learning for intrinsic image decomposition from a single image. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 3248–3257.
[36]
Lukas Murmann, Michael Gharbi, Miika Aittala, and Fredo Durand. 2019. A Multi-Illumination Dataset of Indoor Object Appearance. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).
[37]
Takuya Narihira, Michael Maire, and Stella X Yu. 2015. Direct intrinsics: Learning albedo-shading decomposition by convolutional regression. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 2992–2992.
[38]
Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Francisco Massa, Adam Lerer, James Bradbury, Gregory Chanan, Trevor Killeen, Zeming Lin, Natalia Gimelshein, Luca Antiga, Alban Desmaison, Andreas Kopf, Edward Yang, Zachary DeVito, Martin Raison, Alykhan Tejani, Sasank Chilamkurthy, Benoit Steiner, Lu Fang, Junjie Bai, and Soumith Chintala. 2019. PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library. In Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), H. Wallach, H. Larochelle, A. Beygelzimer, F. d'Alché-Buc, E. Fox, and R. Garnett (Eds.). Curran Associates, Inc., 8024–8035. http://papers.neurips.cc/paper/9015-pytorch-an-imperative-style-high-performance-deep-learning-library.pdf
[39]
Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. 2016. " Why should i trust you?" Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. 1135–1144.
[40]
Saurabh Saini and PJ Narayanan. 2019. Semantic hierarchical priors for intrinsic image decomposition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.03830(2019).
[41]
Saurabh Saini and P. J. Narayanan. 2018. Semantic Priors for Intrinsic Image Decomposition. In British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC).
[42]
Saurabh Saini, Parikshit Sakurikar, and P. J. Narayanan. 2016. Intrinsic image decomposition using focal stacks. In Indian Conference on Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing (ICVGIP).
[43]
Wojciech Samek, Thomas Wiegand, and Klaus-Robert Müller. 2017. Explainable artificial intelligence: Understanding, visualizing and interpreting deep learning models. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.08296(2017).
[44]
Anirban Sarkar, Deepak Vijaykeerthy, Anindya Sarkar, and Vineeth N. Balasubramanian. 2022. A Framework for Learning Ante-hoc Explainable Models via Concepts. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2022), 10276–10285.
[45]
Ramprasaath R Selvaraju, Michael Cogswell, Abhishek Das, Ramakrishna Vedantam, Devi Parikh, and Dhruv Batra. 2017. Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision. 618–626.
[46]
Li Shen, Ping Tan, and Stephen Lin. 2008. Intrinsic image decomposition with non-local texture cues. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE.
[47]
Mike Wu, Michael Hughes, Sonali Parbhoo, Maurizio Zazzi, Volker Roth, and Finale Doshi-Velez. 2018. Beyond sparsity: Tree regularization of deep models for interpretability. In AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, Vol. 32.
[48]
Julian Zaidi, Jonathan Boilard, Ghyslain Gagnon, and Marc-André Carbonneau. 2022. Measuring Disentanglement: A Review of Metrics. IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems PP (2022).
[49]
Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A Efros, Eli Shechtman, and Oliver Wang. 2018. The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).
[50]
Tinghui Zhou, Philipp Krahenbuhl, and Alexei A Efros. 2015. Learning data-driven reflectance priors for intrinsic image decomposition. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
ICVGIP '22: Proceedings of the Thirteenth Indian Conference on Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing
December 2022
506 pages
ISBN:9781450398220
DOI:10.1145/3571600
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 12 May 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Disentanglement
  2. Intrinsic Image Decomposition
  3. ML interpretability
  4. TCAV
  5. evaluation techniques
  6. ill-posed problems

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

ICVGIP'22

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 95 of 286 submissions, 33%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 48
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)21
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 25 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media