Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 1812.01404

Deep Attention-guided Hashing

Abstract

With the rapid growth of multimedia data (e.g., image, audio and video etc.) on the web, learning-based hashing techniques such as Deep Supervised Hashing (DSH) have proven to be very efficient for large-scale multimedia search. The recent successes seen in Learning-based hashing methods are largely due to the success of deep learning-based hashing methods. However, there are some limitations to previous learning-based hashing methods (e.g., the learned hash codes containing repetitive and highly correlated information). In this paper, we propose a novel learning-based hashing method, named Deep Attention-guided Hashing (DAgH). DAgH is implemented using two stream frameworks. The core idea is to use guided hash codes which are generated by the hashing network of the first stream framework (called first hashing network) to guide the training of the hashing network of the second stream framework (called second hashing network). Specifically, in the first network, it leverages an attention network and hashing network to generate the attention-guided hash codes from the original images. The loss function we propose contains two components: the semantic loss and the attention loss. The attention loss is used to punish the attention network to obtain the salient region from pairs of images; in the second network, these attention-guided hash codes are used to guide the training of the second hashing network (i.e., these codes are treated as supervised labels to train the second network). By doing this, DAgH can make full use of the most critical information contained in images to guide the second hashing network in order to learn efficient hash codes in a true end-to-end fashion. Results from our experiments demonstrate that DAgH can generate high quality hash codes and it outperforms current state-of-the-art methods on three benchmark datasets, CIFAR-10, NUS-WIDE, and ImageNet.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Zhan Yang, Osolo Ian Raymond, Wuqing Sun, Jun Long. 2019-01-08. Deep Attention-guided Hashing. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2891894

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

WebArxiv: A Reproducible Benchmark for Evaluating Multimodal Web Agents on arXiv Tasks

Foundation models now enable autonomous agents to interact with real-world websites, but existing benchmarks emphasize general-purpose browsing, underrepresent research-oriented environments and scholarly discovery workflows, and often depend on live sites whose changing content and structure undermine reproducibility. arXiv provides a realistic, reproducible, hierarchically structured, information-centric testbed without privacy-sensitive interactions. We introduce WebArxiv, a static-snapshot benchmark comprising 510 time-invariant tasks, each with a unique deterministic ground truth. Its diverse, realistic scholarly tasks go beyond simple information lookup and rule following to emphasize multi-constraint paper retrieval, fine-grained content extraction, and cross-paper comparison. Evaluations of a range of foundation-model-based web agents show that WebArxiv remains challenging. Behavioral analysis reveals that agents over-rely on fixed interaction histories, causing incomplete or repetitive reasoning. We therefore equip agents with a lightweight dynamic-memory mechanism for adaptive retrieval and reasoning over relevant context. The benchmark and code are available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/74E4423BVNW/README.md.

cs.IR

GreekBarRetrieval: A Benchmark for Greek Statutory Retrieval

Statutory retrieval is necessary for citation-grounded legal question answering, but remains underexplored for Greek. We introduce GreekBarRetrieval, a public retrieval benchmark derived from, and complementing GreekBarBench, which did not include retrieval. The new benchmark comprises 283 bar-exam questions, each accompanied by the facts of the case it refers to, and 6,308 candidate statutory articles to retrieve from. Questions and facts are stated in everyday language, but need to be mapped to the formal terminology of statutes and their abstract legal concepts. A further complication is that not all of the case facts are relevant to each question of a case. Experimenting with three BM25 variants and nine dense retrievers, we find that vanilla dense retrieval far outperforms vanilla sparse retrieval in Recall@100. However, LLM-based query reformulation helps BM25 close that gap, while also improving dense retrieval. With a ten-round ReAct-like LLM reformulation loop that we introduce, BM25 improves further in Recall@100 and obtains the best nDCG and MAP scores of all tested retrievers. Query reformulation also outperforms pseudo-relevance feedback, sparse-dense fusion, and English translation.

cs.IR

Parameterized Dense-Sparse Fusion for Hybrid Retrieval: Tuning a Rank-Score Mix on BEIR SciFact with Qdrant

We study a parameterized hybrid ranker that fuses a dense embedding list and a sparse lexical list. The method has a small, explicit parameter vector: a dense prior $α\in [0,1]$, a score-versus-rank mix $λ\in [0,1]$, an RRF smoothing parameter $κ> 0$, optional list-geometry coefficients that move $α$ per query, and a router margin $τ$ that can turn sparse search off. We grid-search those ranges on SciFact train (809 queries) and freeze the chosen values on SciFact test (300). The tuned rank-score mix ($α= 0.8$, $λ= 0.75$, $κ= 20$) reaches 0.753 nDCG@10 and 0.889 recall@10, outperforming dense BGE (0.742 / 0.871) and equal-weight RRF (0.707 nDCG@10) on that test split. A list-conditioned $α$ adds +0.0006 nDCG; a sparse-off router is rejected by the same train split (any $τ$ that skipped approximately 50% of queries lost nDCG). These coefficients are dataset-specific. Equal RRF with the same models does not beat dense on a nine-zip BEIR macro-average (0.479 vs. 0.519 nDCG@10). Repeating the same train-then-freeze sweep independently on all 20 indexed units beats equal RRF on 20/20 and dense on 16/20 (unit-mean nDCG@10 0.467 vs. 0.462 dense vs. 0.420 RRF). Other corpora should reuse the ranges, not a copy of the SciFact point.

cs.IR