tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36589303.post2150268850286572210..comments2024-01-22T09:48:10.802+01:00Comments on Nihil Obstat: Image Information Retrieval SimmilarityJose Maria Gomez Hidalgohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17053588779560658723noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36589303.post-62565798165774914982008-03-01T07:23:00.000+01:002008-03-01T07:23:00.000+01:00Thank you for your explanation , Ricardo. It is gr...Thank you for your explanation , Ricardo. It is great having you, the very author of imgSeek, reading this post!<BR/><BR/>I understand. Can be sure that <I>score(x,x) > score(x,y)</I> for each images x and y? In that case, we may always get the score of the query image and set it as the maximum score for normalization. If not, we may just heuristically assign 0.99 to all images y with <I>score(x,y) > score(x,x)</I>. I imagine you had this idea before...<BR/><BR/>Besides, I got accepted an article about imgSeek at the Linux+ magazine (www.lpmagazine.org) (in Spanish). I believe it will be printed the next number (march).Jose Maria Gomez Hidalgohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17053588779560658723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36589303.post-982795917784197302008-03-01T00:38:00.000+01:002008-03-01T00:38:00.000+01:00The [0,1] scale is artificial. Internally, the sim...The [0,1] scale is artificial. Internally, the similarity ratio for a given image, given as a result of running the querying algorithm described on the paper is a float number with no absolute meaning. It should be considered only relatively to other images. So if sim(x,y) > sim(x,z) then x is more similar to y than it is to z. That's the only kind of conclusion you should get at. Internally imgSeek will normalize the output score calculated for each indexed candidate image by considering the max similarity as being the average similarity achieved by running several similar tests as you did and adding a marging of error so we don't run the risk of getting a result greater than 1.rnchttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16520043212251579884noreply@blogger.com