skip to main content
10.1145/3332186.3333046acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespearcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Shuffler: A Large Scale Data Management Tool for Machine Learning in Computer Vision

Authors Info & Claims
Published:28 July 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Datasets in the computer vision academic research community are primarily static. Once a dataset is accepted as a benchmark for a computer vision task, researchers working on this task will not alter it in order to make their results reproducible. At the same time, when exploring new tasks and new applications, datasets tend to be an ever changing entity. A practitioner may combine existing public datasets, filter images or objects in them, change annotations or add new ones to fit a task at hand, visualize sample images, or perhaps output statistics in the form of text or plots. In fact, datasets change as practitioners experiment with data as much as with algorithms, trying to make the most out of machine learning models. Given that ML and deep learning call for large volumes of data to produce satisfactory results, it is no surprise that the resulting data and software management associated to dealing with live datasets can be quite complex. As far as we know, there is no flexible, publicly available instrument to facilitate manipulating image data and their annotations throughout a ML pipeline. In this work, we present Shuffler, an open source tool that makes it easy to manage large computer vision datasets. It stores annotations in a relational, human-readable database. Shuffler defines over 40 data handling operations with annotations that are commonly useful in supervised learning applied to computer vision and supports some of the most well-known computer vision datasets. Finally, it is easily extensible, making the addition of new operations and datasets a task that is fast and easy to accomplish.

References

  1. G. Bradski. 2000. The OpenCV Library.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Donald D. Chamberlin and Raymond F. Boyce. 1974. SEQUEL: A Structured English Query Language. In 1974 ACM SIGFIDET (Now SIGMOD) Workshop on Data Description, Access and Control (SIGFIDET '74). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 249--264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. François Chollet et al. 2015. Keras. https://keras.ioGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. E. F. Codd. 1970. A Relational Model of Data for Large Shared Data Banks. Commun. ACM 13, 6 (June 1970), 377--387. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Marius Cordts, Mohamed Omran, Sebastian Ramos, Timo Rehfeld, Markus Enzweiler, Rodrigo Benenson, Uwe Franke, Stefan Roth, and Bernt Schiele. 2016. The Cityscapes Dataset for Semantic Urban Scene Understanding. In The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 3213--3223.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Deng, W. Dong, R. Socher, L. Li, Kai Li, and Li Fei-Fei. 2009. ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database. In The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 248--255.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Abhishek Dutta and Andrew Zisserman. 2019. The VGG Image Annotator (VIA). arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.10699 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. M. Everingham, S. M. A. Eslami, L. Van Gool, C. K. I. Williams, J. Winn, and A. Zisserman. 2015. The Pascal Visual Object Classes Challenge: A Retrospective. International Journal of Computer Vision 111, 1 (Jan. 2015), 98--136. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. A. Geiger, P. Lenz, and R. Urtasun. 2012. Are we ready for autonomous driving? The KITTI vision benchmark suite. In The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 3354--3361. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. X. Huang, X. Cheng, Q. Geng, B. Cao, D. Zhou, P. Wang, Y. Lin, and R. Yang. 2018. The ApolloScape Dataset for Autonomous Driving. In The IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW). 1067--10676.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. J. D. Hunter. 2007. Matplotlib: A 2D graphics environment. Computing In Science & Engineering 9, 3 (2007), 90--95. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Dollár, and C. Lawrence Zitnick. 2014. Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context. In The IEEE European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), David Fleet, Tomas Pajdla, Bernt Schiele, and Tinne Tuytelaars (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 740--755.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. H. Miao, A. Li, L. S. Davis, and A. Deshpande. 2017. ModelHub: Deep Learning Lifecycle Management. In 2017 IEEE 33rd International Conference on Data Engineering(ICDE). 1393--1394.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. G. Neuhold, T. Ollmann, S. R. BulÚ, and P. Kontschieder. 2017. The Mapillary Vistas Dataset for Semantic Understanding of Street Scenes. In The IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). 5000--5009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Adam Paszke, Sam Gross, Soumith Chintala, Gregory Chanan, Edward Yang, Zachary DeVito, Zeming Lin, Alban Desmaison, Luca Antiga, and Adam Lerer. 2017. Automatic differentiation in PyTorch. In The International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS-W).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. J. Per, V. S. Kenk, R. Mandeljc, M. Kristan, and S. Kovacic. 2012. Dana36: A Multi-camera Image Dataset for Object Identification in Surveillance Scenarios. In 2012 IEEE Ninth International Conference on Advanced Video and Signal-Based Surveillance. 64--69. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Bryan C. Russell, Antonio Torralba, Kevin P. Murphy, and William T. Free-man. 2008. LabelMe: A Database and Web-Based Tool for Image Annotation. Int. J. Comput. Vision 77, 1-3 (May 2008), 157--173. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Huazhe Xu, Yang Gao, Fisher Yu, and Trevor Darrell. 2017. End-to-End Learning of Driving Models from Large-Scale Video Datasets. In The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). 3530--3538.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Shuffler: A Large Scale Data Management Tool for Machine Learning in Computer Vision

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Other conferences
                PEARC '19: Proceedings of the Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing on Rise of the Machines (learning)
                July 2019
                775 pages
                ISBN:9781450372275
                DOI:10.1145/3332186
                • General Chair:
                • Tom Furlani

                Copyright © 2019 ACM

                Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 28 July 2019

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article
                • Research
                • Refereed limited

                Acceptance Rates

                Overall Acceptance Rate133of202submissions,66%

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader