We follow the idea of formulating vision as inverse graphics and propose a new type of element for this task, a neural-symbolic capsule. It is capable of de-rendering a scene into semantic information feed-forward, as well as rendering it feed-backward. An initial set of capsules for graphical primitives is obtained from a generative grammar and connected into a full capsule network. Lifelong meta-learning continuously improves this network's detection capabilities by adding capsules for new and more complex objects it detects in a scene using few-shot learning. Preliminary results demonstrate the potential of our novel approach.
There has been a strong effort to make a purely neural approach to vision more interpretable @cite_27 @cite_28 @cite_9 @cite_10 @cite_13 @cite_24 . An alternative approach to interpretability has been to deeply intertwine symbolic methods into connectionist methods. For computer vision, this is proving fruitful for de-rendering and scene decomposition @cite_2 @cite_32 @cite_8 @cite_6 @cite_23 @cite_14 @cite_0 . Many of these approaches use shape programs, a decomposition of the scene into a set of rendering instructions. The scene-graphs we construct can be viewed as such shape programs, but in a different representation. This symbolic information is well suited for more complex tasks, such as visual question answering (VQA) @cite_20 @cite_3 and scene manipulation @cite_30 . We follow many of the presented ideas in our work.
@cite_13 @cite_30 @cite_14 @cite_8 @cite_28 @cite_9 @cite_32 @cite_6 @cite_3 @cite_24 @cite_0 @cite_27 @cite_23 @cite_2 @cite_10 @cite_20
2953350888 2891021031 2963738360 2522258376
Analysis-by-synthesis has been a successful approach for many tasks in computer vision, such as 6D pose estimation of an object in an RGB-D image which is the topic of this work. The idea is to compare the observation with the output of a forward process, such as a rendered image of the object of interest in a particular pose. Due to occlusion or complicated sensor noise, it can be difficult to perform this comparison in a meaningful way. We propose an approach that "learns to compare", while taking these difficulties into account. This is done by describing the posterior density of a particular object pose with a convolutional neural network (CNN) that compares an observed and rendered image. The network is trained with the maximum likelihood paradigm. We observe empirically that the CNN does not specialize to the geometry or appearance of specific objects, and it can be used with objects of vastly different shapes and appearances, and in different backgrounds. Compared to state-of-the-art, we demonstrate a significant improvement on two different datasets which include a total of eleven objects, cluttered background, and heavy occlusion. We marry two powerful ideas: deep representation learning for visual recognition and language understanding, and symbolic program execution for reasoning. Our neural-symbolic visual question answering (NS-VQA) system first recovers a structural scene representation from the image and a program trace from the question. It then executes the program on the scene representation to obtain an answer. Incorporating symbolic structure as prior knowledge offers three unique advantages. First, executing programs on a symbolic space is more robust to long program traces; our model can solve complex reasoning tasks better, achieving an accuracy of 99.8 on the CLEVR dataset. Second, the model is more data- and memory-efficient: it performs well after learning on a small number of training data; it can also encode an image into a compact representation, requiring less storage than existing methods for offline question answering. Third, symbolic program execution offers full transparency to the reasoning process; we are thus able to interpret and diagnose each execution step. We marry two powerful ideas: deep representation learning for visual recognition and language understanding, and symbolic program execution for reasoning. Our visual question answering (VQA) system first recovers a structural scene representation from the image and a program trace from the question. It then executes the program on the scene representation to obtain an answer. Incorporating symbolic structure as prior knowledge offers three advantages. First, executing programs on a symbolic space is more robust to long program traces. Our model can solve complex reasoning tasks better, achieving an accuracy of 99.8 on the CLEVR dataset. Second, the model is more data- and memory-efficient: it learns to perform well on a small number of training data; it can also encode an image into a compact representation and answer questions offline, using only 1 of the storage needed by the best competing methods. Third, symbolic program execution offers full transparency to the reasoning process; we are thus able to interpret and diagnose each execution step. Our model recovers the ground truth programs precisely. This paper proposes to improve visual question answering (VQA) with structured representations of both scene contents and questions. A key challenge in VQA is to require joint reasoning over the visual and text domains. The predominant CNN LSTM-based approach to VQA is limited by monolithic vector representations that largely ignore structure in the scene and in the form of the question. CNN feature vectors cannot effectively capture situations as simple as multiple object instances, and LSTMs process questions as series of words, which does not reflect the true complexity of language structure. We instead propose to build graphs over the scene objects and over the question words, and we describe a deep neural network that exploits the structure in these representations. This shows significant benefit over the sequential processing of LSTMs. The overall efficacy of our approach is demonstrated by significant improvements over the state-of-the-art, from 71.2 to 74.4 in accuracy on the "abstract scenes" multiple-choice benchmark, and from 34.7 to 39.1 in accuracy over pairs of "balanced" scenes, i.e. images with fine-grained differences and opposite yes no answers to a same question.