Skip to content


  • Research Article
  • Open Access

Indoor versus Outdoor Scene Classification Using Probabilistic Neural Network

  • 1Email author,
  • 1,
  • 1,
  • 1 and
  • 1
EURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing20062007:094298

  • Received: 1 December 2005
  • Accepted: 27 May 2006
  • Published:


We propose a method for indoor versus outdoor scene classification using a probabilistic neural network (PNN). The scene is initially segmented (unsupervised) using fuzzy -means clustering (FCM) and features based on color, texture, and shape are extracted from each of the image segments. The image is thus represented by a feature set, with a separate feature vector for each image segment. As the number of segments differs from one scene to another, the feature set representation of the scene is of varying dimension. Therefore a modified PNN is used for classifying the variable dimension feature sets. The proposed technique is evaluated on two databases: IITM-SCID2 (scene classification image database) and that used by Payne and Singh in 2005. The performance of different feature combinations is compared using the modified PNN.


  • Color
  • Neural Network
  • Information Technology
  • Feature Vector
  • Quantum Information


Authors’ Affiliations

Visualization and Perception Laboratory, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, 600 036, India


  1. Saber E, Tekalp AM: Integration of color, edge, shape, and texture features for automatic region-based image annotation and retrieval. Journal of Electronic Imaging 1998,7(3):684-700. 10.1117/1.482605View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Payne A, Singh S: Indoor vs. outdoor scene classification in digital photographs. Pattern Recognition 2005,38(10):1533-1545. 10.1016/j.patcog.2004.12.014View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Jain AK, Vailaya A: Image retrieval using color and shape. Pattern Recognition 1996,29(8):1233-1244. 10.1016/0031-3203(95)00160-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Vailaya A, Jain A, Zhang HJ: On image classification: city images vs. landscapes. Pattern Recognition 1998,31(12):1921-1935. 10.1016/S0031-3203(98)00079-XView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Iqbal Q, Aggarwal JK: Image retrieval via isotropic and anisotropic mappings. Proceedings of IAPR Workshop on Pattern Recognition in Information Systems, July 2001, Setubal, Portugal 34-49.Google Scholar
  6. Iqbal Q, Aggarwal JK: Applying perceptual grouping to content-based image retrieval: building images. Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR '99), June 1999, Fort Collins, Colo, USA 1: 42-48.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Haralick RM, Shapiro LG: Computer and Robot Vision. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass, USA; 1992.Google Scholar
  8. Yu H, Grimson WEL: Combining configurational and statistical approaches in image retrieval. Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Pacific Rim Conference on Multimedia: Advances in Multimedia Information Processing, October 2001, Beijing, China, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2195: 293-300.MATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Wang JZ, Li J, Wiederhold G: Simplicity: semantics-sensitive integrated matching for picture libraries. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 2001,23(9):947-963. 10.1109/34.955109View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Luo J, Boutell M: Natural scene classification using overcomplete ICA. Pattern Recognition 2005,38(10):1507-1519. 10.1016/j.patcog.2005.02.015View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Gorkani MM, Picard RW: Texture orientation for sorting photos "at a glance". Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR '94), October 1994, Jerusalem, Israel 1: 459-464.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Navid Serrano AS, Luo J: A computationally efficient approach to indoor/outdoor scene classification. Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR '02), August 2002, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada 4: 146-149.Google Scholar
  13. Rao SG, Puri M, Das S: Unsupervised segmentation of texture images using a combination of gabor and wavelet features. Proceedings of the 4th Indian Conference on Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing (ICVGIP '04), December 2004, Kolkata, India 370-375.Google Scholar
  14. Fauzi MFA, Lewis PH: A fully unsupervised texture segmentation algorithm. Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC '03), September 2003, Norwich, UK 519-528.Google Scholar
  15. Salari E, Ling Z: Texture segmentation using hierarchical wavelet decomposition. Pattern Recognition 1995, 28: 1819-1824. 10.1016/0031-3203(95)00054-2View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Gordon IE: Theories of Visual Perception. 3rd edition. Psychology Press, New York, NY, USA; 2004.Google Scholar
  17. Lu C-S, Chung P-C, Chen C-F: Unsupervised texture segmentation via wavelet transform. Pattern Recognition 1997,30(5):729-742. 10.1016/S0031-3203(96)00116-1View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Carson C, Thomas M, Belongie M, Hellerstein J, Malik J: Blobworld: a system for region based image indexing and retrieval. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Visual Information Systems, June 1999, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  19. Mokhtarian F, Bober M: Curvature Scale Space Representation: Theory, Applications and MPEG-7 Standarization. Kluwer Academic, Boston, Mass, USA; 2003.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Specht DF: Probabilistic neural networks. Neural Networks 1990,3(1):109-118. 10.1016/0893-6080(90)90049-QView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Richard PEH, Duda O, Stork DG: Pattern Classification. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 2004.MATHGoogle Scholar
  22. IIT Madras Scene Classification Image Database (SCID)


© Lalit Gupta et al. 2007