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.View ArticleGoogle 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 ArticleGoogle 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