Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39080894›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging2021

Comparing CAM Algorithms for the Identification of Salient Image Features in Iconography Artwork Analysis.

Nicolò Oreste Pinciroli Vago, Federico Milani, Piero Fraternali, Ricardo da Silva Torres

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nicolò Oreste Pinciroli VagoDepartment of Electronics Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7906-4987
Federico MilaniDepartment of Electronics Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2700-2228
Piero FraternaliDepartment of Electronics Information and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6945-2625
Ricardo da Silva TorresDepartment of ICT and Engineering, NTNU-Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 6009 Ålesund, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-9772-263X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Iconography studies the visual content of artworks by considering the themes portrayed in them and their representation. Computer Vision has been used to identify iconographic subjects in paintings and Convolutional Neural Networks enabled the effective classification of characters in Christian art paintings. However, it still has to be demonstrated if the classification results obtained by CNNs rely on the same iconographic properties that human experts exploit when studying iconography and if the architecture of a classifier trained on whole artwork images can be exploited to support the much harder task of object detection. A suitable approach for exposing the process of classification by neural models relies on Class Activation Maps, which emphasize the areas of an image contributing the most to the classification. This work compares state-of-the-art algorithms (CAM, Grad-CAM, Grad-CAM++, and Smooth Grad-CAM++) in terms of their capacity of identifying the iconographic attributes that determine the classification of characters in Christian art paintings. Quantitative and qualitative analyses show that Grad-CAM, Grad-CAM++, and Smooth Grad-CAM++ have similar performances while CAM has lower efficacy. Smooth Grad-CAM++ isolates multiple disconnected image regions that identify small iconographic symbols well. Grad-CAM produces wider and more contiguous areas that cover large iconographic symbols better. The salient image areas computed by the CAM algorithms have been used to estimate object-level bounding boxes and a quantitative analysis shows that the boxes estimated with Grad-CAM reach 55% average IoU, 61% GT-known localization and 31% mAP. The obtained results are a step towards the computer-aided study of the variations of iconographic elements positioning and mutual relations in artworks and open the way to the automatic creation of bounding boxes for training detectors of iconographic symbols in Christian art images.

Indexed as

artwork analysisclass activation mapsconvolutional neural networkexplainabilityiconography

Identifiers

PMID39080894
PMCPMC8321385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.