Paper detail

Re-ranking for Writer Identification and Writer Retrieval

Automatic writer identification is a common problem in document analysis. State-of-the-art methods typically focus on the feature extraction step with traditional or deep-learning-based techniques. In retrieval problems, re-ranking is a commonly used technique to improve the results. Re-ranking refines an initial ranking result by using the knowledge contained in the ranked result, e. g., by exploiting nearest neighbor relations. To the best of our knowledge, re-ranking has not been used for writer identification/retrieval. A possible reason might be that publicly available benchmark datasets contain only few samples per writer which makes a re-ranking less promising. We show that a re-ranking step based on k-reciprocal nearest neighbor relationships is advantageous for writer identification, even if only a few samples per writer are available. We use these reciprocal relationships in two ways: encode them into new vectors, as originally proposed, or integrate them in terms of query-expansion. We show that both techniques outperform the baseline results in terms of mAP on three writer identification datasets.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.