Abstract Images Have Different Levels of Retrievability Per Reverse Image Search Engine
Much computer vision research has focused on natural images, but technical documents typically consist of abstract images, such as charts, drawings, diagrams, and schematics. How well do general web search engines discover abstract images? Recent advancements in computer vision and machine learning...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | arXiv.org 2022-11 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | |
container_title | arXiv.org |
container_volume | |
creator | Jones, Shawn M Oyen, Diane |
description | Much computer vision research has focused on natural images, but technical documents typically consist of abstract images, such as charts, drawings, diagrams, and schematics. How well do general web search engines discover abstract images? Recent advancements in computer vision and machine learning have led to the rise of reverse image search engines. Where conventional search engines accept a text query and return a set of document results, including images, a reverse image search accepts an image as a query and returns a set of images as results. This paper evaluates how well common reverse image search engines discover abstract images. We conducted an experiment leveraging images from Wikimedia Commons, a website known to be well indexed by Baidu, Bing, Google, and Yandex. We measure how difficult an image is to find again (retrievability), what percentage of images returned are relevant (precision), and the average number of results a visitor must review before finding the submitted image (mean reciprocal rank). When trying to discover the same image again among similar images, Yandex performs best. When searching for pages containing a specific image, Google and Yandex outperform the others when discovering photographs with precision scores ranging from 0.8191 to 0.8297, respectively. In both of these cases, Google and Yandex perform better with natural images than with abstract ones achieving a difference in retrievability as high as 54\% between images in these categories. These results affect anyone applying common web search engines to search for technical documents that use abstract images. |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2732905689</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2732905689</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_27329056893</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNi8sKwjAUBYMgWLT_cMF1ISb2tRStVHAhKrgsabmpKbXVJA349xb0A1wdmJkzIR7jfBUka8ZmxDemoZSyKGZhyD1y25TGalFZODxEjQZy4RB2SkrU2Fk4osPWQC_hjFYrdKJUrbJvOKEekUNt8HuFCwpd3SHratXhgkylaA36v52T5T67bvPgqfvXgMYWTT_oblQFizlLaRglKf-v-gD1Y0Do</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2732905689</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Abstract Images Have Different Levels of Retrievability Per Reverse Image Search Engine</title><source>Freely Accessible Journals</source><creator>Jones, Shawn M ; Oyen, Diane</creator><creatorcontrib>Jones, Shawn M ; Oyen, Diane</creatorcontrib><description>Much computer vision research has focused on natural images, but technical documents typically consist of abstract images, such as charts, drawings, diagrams, and schematics. How well do general web search engines discover abstract images? Recent advancements in computer vision and machine learning have led to the rise of reverse image search engines. Where conventional search engines accept a text query and return a set of document results, including images, a reverse image search accepts an image as a query and returns a set of images as results. This paper evaluates how well common reverse image search engines discover abstract images. We conducted an experiment leveraging images from Wikimedia Commons, a website known to be well indexed by Baidu, Bing, Google, and Yandex. We measure how difficult an image is to find again (retrievability), what percentage of images returned are relevant (precision), and the average number of results a visitor must review before finding the submitted image (mean reciprocal rank). When trying to discover the same image again among similar images, Yandex performs best. When searching for pages containing a specific image, Google and Yandex outperform the others when discovering photographs with precision scores ranging from 0.8191 to 0.8297, respectively. In both of these cases, Google and Yandex perform better with natural images than with abstract ones achieving a difference in retrievability as high as 54\% between images in these categories. These results affect anyone applying common web search engines to search for technical documents that use abstract images.</description><identifier>EISSN: 2331-8422</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ithaca: Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</publisher><subject>Computer vision ; Documents ; Machine learning ; Search engines ; Technical information ; Websites</subject><ispartof>arXiv.org, 2022-11</ispartof><rights>2022. This work is published under http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>780,784</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jones, Shawn M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oyen, Diane</creatorcontrib><title>Abstract Images Have Different Levels of Retrievability Per Reverse Image Search Engine</title><title>arXiv.org</title><description>Much computer vision research has focused on natural images, but technical documents typically consist of abstract images, such as charts, drawings, diagrams, and schematics. How well do general web search engines discover abstract images? Recent advancements in computer vision and machine learning have led to the rise of reverse image search engines. Where conventional search engines accept a text query and return a set of document results, including images, a reverse image search accepts an image as a query and returns a set of images as results. This paper evaluates how well common reverse image search engines discover abstract images. We conducted an experiment leveraging images from Wikimedia Commons, a website known to be well indexed by Baidu, Bing, Google, and Yandex. We measure how difficult an image is to find again (retrievability), what percentage of images returned are relevant (precision), and the average number of results a visitor must review before finding the submitted image (mean reciprocal rank). When trying to discover the same image again among similar images, Yandex performs best. When searching for pages containing a specific image, Google and Yandex outperform the others when discovering photographs with precision scores ranging from 0.8191 to 0.8297, respectively. In both of these cases, Google and Yandex perform better with natural images than with abstract ones achieving a difference in retrievability as high as 54\% between images in these categories. These results affect anyone applying common web search engines to search for technical documents that use abstract images.</description><subject>Computer vision</subject><subject>Documents</subject><subject>Machine learning</subject><subject>Search engines</subject><subject>Technical information</subject><subject>Websites</subject><issn>2331-8422</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNi8sKwjAUBYMgWLT_cMF1ISb2tRStVHAhKrgsabmpKbXVJA349xb0A1wdmJkzIR7jfBUka8ZmxDemoZSyKGZhyD1y25TGalFZODxEjQZy4RB2SkrU2Fk4osPWQC_hjFYrdKJUrbJvOKEekUNt8HuFCwpd3SHratXhgkylaA36v52T5T67bvPgqfvXgMYWTT_oblQFizlLaRglKf-v-gD1Y0Do</recordid><startdate>20221103</startdate><enddate>20221103</enddate><creator>Jones, Shawn M</creator><creator>Oyen, Diane</creator><general>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</general><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20221103</creationdate><title>Abstract Images Have Different Levels of Retrievability Per Reverse Image Search Engine</title><author>Jones, Shawn M ; Oyen, Diane</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_27329056893</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Computer vision</topic><topic>Documents</topic><topic>Machine learning</topic><topic>Search engines</topic><topic>Technical information</topic><topic>Websites</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jones, Shawn M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oyen, Diane</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jones, Shawn M</au><au>Oyen, Diane</au><format>book</format><genre>document</genre><ristype>GEN</ristype><atitle>Abstract Images Have Different Levels of Retrievability Per Reverse Image Search Engine</atitle><jtitle>arXiv.org</jtitle><date>2022-11-03</date><risdate>2022</risdate><eissn>2331-8422</eissn><abstract>Much computer vision research has focused on natural images, but technical documents typically consist of abstract images, such as charts, drawings, diagrams, and schematics. How well do general web search engines discover abstract images? Recent advancements in computer vision and machine learning have led to the rise of reverse image search engines. Where conventional search engines accept a text query and return a set of document results, including images, a reverse image search accepts an image as a query and returns a set of images as results. This paper evaluates how well common reverse image search engines discover abstract images. We conducted an experiment leveraging images from Wikimedia Commons, a website known to be well indexed by Baidu, Bing, Google, and Yandex. We measure how difficult an image is to find again (retrievability), what percentage of images returned are relevant (precision), and the average number of results a visitor must review before finding the submitted image (mean reciprocal rank). When trying to discover the same image again among similar images, Yandex performs best. When searching for pages containing a specific image, Google and Yandex outperform the others when discovering photographs with precision scores ranging from 0.8191 to 0.8297, respectively. In both of these cases, Google and Yandex perform better with natural images than with abstract ones achieving a difference in retrievability as high as 54\% between images in these categories. These results affect anyone applying common web search engines to search for technical documents that use abstract images.</abstract><cop>Ithaca</cop><pub>Cornell University Library, arXiv.org</pub><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | EISSN: 2331-8422 |
ispartof | arXiv.org, 2022-11 |
issn | 2331-8422 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2732905689 |
source | Freely Accessible Journals |
subjects | Computer vision Documents Machine learning Search engines Technical information Websites |
title | Abstract Images Have Different Levels of Retrievability Per Reverse Image Search Engine |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T12%3A03%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=document&rft.atitle=Abstract%20Images%20Have%20Different%20Levels%20of%20Retrievability%20Per%20Reverse%20Image%20Search%20Engine&rft.jtitle=arXiv.org&rft.au=Jones,%20Shawn%20M&rft.date=2022-11-03&rft.eissn=2331-8422&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2732905689%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2732905689&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |