Deep Canonical Correlation Analysis
By Galen Andrew, Raman Arora, J. Bilmes, Karen Livescu. 2013
2,085 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Representation & Self-Supervised Learning
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Representation & Self-Supervised Learning
- Dacheng Tao
- Yoshua Bengio
- James R. Glass
- Mingsheng Long
- Percy Liang
- Jianmin Wang
- Bernhard Schölkopf
- Tao A. Xiang
Citations in the corpus
- A Retrieve-and-Edit Framework for Predicting Structured Outputs (2018, background): “A related idea is cross-modal embeddings, which jointly embed and align items in different domains (such as images and captions) using autoencoders [39, 2, 31, 10].”
- Grounded Compositional Semantics for Finding and Describing Images with Sentences (2014, methodology): “Technically, one could combine the recently introduced deep CCA Andrew et al. (2013) and train the recursive neural network architectures with the CCA objective.”
- On Mutual Information Maximization for Representation Learning (2019, methodology): “This setup has been used in deep canonical correlation analysis papers (Andrew et al., 2013), where the target is to maximize the correlation between the representations.”
- Achieving Human Parity on Visual Question Answering (2021, background): “For example, Sharma et al. [66] extend CCA to a supervised version by leveraging the the semantic category labels to guide the representation learning.”
- Learning Deep Structure-Preserving Image-Text Embeddings (2015, methodology): “From the viewpoint of architecture, our method is similar to the two-branch Deep CCA models [1, 33], though it avoids Deep CCA’s training-time difficulties associated with covariance matrix estimation.”
- Learning Sight from Sound: Ambient Sound Provides Supervision for Visual Learning (2017, neutral): “In particular, Arandjelovi´c and Zisserman (2017) solved a similar unsupervised learning problem, but instead of using hand-crafted audio features, they jointly learned audio and visual CNNs.”
- The Incomplete Rosetta Stone problem: Identifiability results for Multi-view Nonlinear ICA (2019, background): “Nonlinear extensions of the basic CCA framework have been proposed [26, 13, 3, 29], but identifiability results in the sense we consider in this paper are lacking.”
- Deep Multimodal Feature Analysis for Action Recognition in RGB+D Videos (2016, background): “[1] proposed a deep canonical correlation analysis network with two stacks of deep embedding followed by a CCA on top layer.”
- Learning Two-Branch Neural Networks for Image-Text Matching Tasks (2017, background): “[25] and Yan and Mikolajczyk [26] proposed to cast CCA into a deep learning framework.”
- Ambient Sound Provides Supervision for Visual Learning (2016, neutral): “Also, in contrast to other recent work in multi-modal representation learning [28,33,2], our technical approach is based on solving a self-supervised classification problem (rather than a generative model or autoencoder), and our goal is to learn visual representations that are generally useful for ”
- Multi-Perspective Sentence Similarity Modeling with Convolutional Neural Networks (2015, background): “A variety of other neural network models have been proposed for similarity tasks (Weston et al., 2011; Huang et al., 2013; Andrew et al., 2013; Bromley et al., 1993).”
- Attention-based Multimodal Neural Machine Translation (2016, background): “Rather than using the embedding of each modality independently, Some works (Hardoon et al., 2004; Andrew et al., 2013; Ngiam et al., 2011; Srivastava and Salakhutdinov, 2014) focus on learning joint space of different modalities.”
- Pairwise Word Interaction Modeling with Deep Neural Networks for Semantic Similarity Measurement (2016, background): “There are many other examples of neural network-based sentence modeling approaches for the STS problem (Yin and Sch¨utze, 2015; Huang et al., 2013; Andrew et al., 2013; Weston et al., 2011; Socher et al., 2011; Zarrella et al., 2015).”
- Comparing Recognition Performance and Robustness of Multimodal Deep Learning Models for Multimodal Emotion Recognition (2021, methodology): “In the original DCCA [34], the authors did not explicitly describe how to use transformed features for real-world applications via machine learning algorithms.”
- Deep Visual-Semantic Hashing for Cross-Modal Retrieval (2016, background): “Deep architectures are very powerful for extracting the multimodal embedding shared by different modalities since they can extract nonlinear feature representations to bridge different modalities effectively [2, 9, 34, 19, 20, 6, 18].”
- Coincidence, Categorization, and Consolidation: Learning to Recognize Sounds with Minimal Supervision (2019, methodology): “Three prominent deep learning approaches are (i) Deep Canonical Correlation Analysis (DeepCCA) [26], a deep learning generalization of linear CCA; (ii) Look, Listen, and Learn ( L 3 ) [12], which learns representations that can predict audio-visual frame correspondence in videos; and (iii) metric…”
- A Comprehensive Survey on Pose-Invariant Face Recognition (2015, methodology): “These include the lasso regularization Annan et al. (2012); Zhang et al. (2013b), the ridge regularization Annan et al. (2012), local similarity regularization Hao and Qi (2015), and neighborhood consistency regularization Hao and Qi (2015). Based on a similar assumption to the above works, Yin et a”
- Training Deep Networks with Structured Layers by Matrix Backpropagation (2015, background): “Some examples are in the context of camera calibration [32], as mentioned, for learning parameters in a normalized cuts model[13], learning the parameters of Gaussian CRFs for denoising [33] and learning deep canonical correlation models [34].”
- Unsupervised Multimodal Neural Machine Translation with Pseudo Visual Pivoting (2020, positive): “For learning VSE, we leverage the contrastive loss (Kiros et al., 2014) from cross-modal retrieval, which is shown more robust than maximizing canonical correlation among modalities as in (Andrew et al., 2013; Huang et al., 2018).”