GENERATIVE SCATTERNET HYBRID DEEP LEARNING (G-SHDL) NETWORK WITH
STRUCTURAL PRIORS FOR SEMANTIC IMAGE SEGMENTATION
Amarjot Singh and Nick Kingsbury

arXiv:1802.03374v2 [] 13 Feb 2018

Signal Processing Group, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, U.K.
ABSTRACT
This paper proposes a generative ScatterNet hybrid deep
learning (G-SHDL) network for semantic image segmentation. The proposed generative architecture is able to train
rapidly from relatively small labeled datasets using the introduced structural priors. In addition, the number of filters
in each layer of the architecture is optimized resulting in a
computationally efficient architecture. The G-SHDL network
produces state-of-the-art classification performance against
unsupervised and semi-supervised learning on two image
datasets. Advantages of the G-SHDL network over supervised methods are demonstrated with experiments performed
on training datasets of reduced size.
Index Terms— SHDL, DTCWT, Semantic Image Segmentation, Convolutional neural network.
1. INTRODUCTION
Semantic image segmentation is the task of partitioning and
labeling the image into pixel groups which belong to the same
object class. It has been widely used for numerous applications such as robotics [1], medical applications [2], augmented reality [3], and automated driving [4].
In the recent years, three types of learning architectures
have been designed to learn the necessary representations
required to solve the semantic image segmentation task.
These methods include architectures that: (i) encode handcrafted features extracted from the input images into rich
non-hierarchical representations; (ii) learn multiple levels of
feature hierarchies from the input data; (iii) make use of the
ideas from both categories to extract feature hierarchies from
hand-crafted features.
He et al [5] is an example of the first class of architectures
which utilize handcrafted region and global label features
in multiscale conditional random fields to get the desired
semantic segmentation. The second class of architectures
includes Convolutional Neural Networks [6] and Deep Belief
Networks [7] that learn multiple layers of features directly
from the input images. These methods have been shown to
achieve state-of-the-art segmentation performance on various datasets [8]. Despite their success, their design and
optimal configuration is not well understood which makes
it difficult to develop them. In addition, the vast arrays of

network parameters can only be learned with the help of
powerful computational resources and large training datasets.
These may not be available for many applications such as
stock market prediction [9], medical imaging [2] etc. The
third class of models combine the concepts from both of the
above-mentioned models to learn shallow or deep feature
hierarchies from low-level hand-crafted descriptors. Yu [10]
learned multiple layers of hierarchical features from patch
descriptors using stacked denoising autoencoders. This class
of models has produced promising performance on various
datasets [10].
This paper proposes the Generative ScatterNet Hybrid
Deep Learning (G-SHDL) network with structural priors for
semantic image segmentation. The G-SHDL network is inspired by the ScatterNet Hybrid Deep Learning (SHDL) [12]
network. The SHDL network extracts handcrafted features
from the input image using the ScatterNet front-end which are
then used by the unsupervised learning based Stacked PCA
mid-section layers to learn hierarchical features. These hierarchical features are finally used by the supervised back-end
module to solve the object classification task. The approximate minimization of the reconstruction loss function for the
PCA layers is obtained simply from the Eigen decomposition
of the image patches [13]. This results in rapid learning of
the hierarchical features. However we found that, despite the
favorable increase in the rate of learning, the approximate solution of PCA loss function produces undesired checkerboard
filters which limit the performance of these models.
The proposed G-SHDL network is an improved version
of the SHDL network that uses ScatterNet as the front-end,
similar to the SHDL network, to extract hand-crafted features
from the input images. However, instead of PCA layers in the
middle section, the G-SHDL uses four stacked layers of convolutional Restricted Boltzmann Machine (RBM) with structural priors to learn an invariant hierarchy of features. These
hierarchy features are finally used by a supervised conditional
random field (CRF) to solve the more complicated task of semantic segmentation as opposed to object recognition.
The main contributions of the paper are stated below:
• Rapid Structural Prior based Learning of RBM: Training of convolutional RBMs is slow as the partition function is approximated by sampling using MCMC (Section 2.2). In order to accelerate the training, the filters

Fig. 1. The proposed G-SHDL network uses the ScatterNet front-end to extract hand-crafted scatternet features from the input image at L0,
L1 and L2 using DTCWT filters at 2 scales and 6 fixed orientations (filters shown). The handcrafted features extracted at the three layers
are concatenated and given as input to the 4 stacked convolutional RBM layers (L3, L4, L5, L6) with 200, 150, 100 and 50 filters to learn
a hierarchy of features. Each RBM layer is initialized with PCA based structural priors with same number of filters which improves their
training as shown by L3 to L6 convergence graphs. The RBM layers are trained in a layer by layer greedy type fashion. Once a RBM layer is
trained the optimal number of filters are selected using 5 fold cross validation that results in a computationally efficient architecture (Table. 1)
as the later layers can feature from a smaller feature space. The features learned by the last RBM layer (L6) are used by the CRF for semantic
image segmentation. PCA layers can learn the undesired checkerboard filters (shown in red) which are avoided and not used as the prior for
the RBMs. In order to detect and remove the checkerboard filters from the learned filter set, we used the method defined in [11].
in each RBM layer are initialized with structural priors (filters) learned using PCA as opposed to random
initialization. This has been shown to accelerate the
training of RBMs (Fig. 1). Since, it is extremely fast
to learn the filters or structural priors using PCA (eigen
decomposition), the whole process is much faster than
training RBMs with random weight initialization.
• Computationally Efficient: The number of filters in a
particular RBM layer are optimized using crossvalidation that results in a computationally efficient architecture as the filters in the subsequent layer are now
learned from a smaller feature space.
• Advantages over supervised learning: With G-SHDL
only a fraction of the training samples need to be labelled, whereas supervised networks require large labelled training datsets for effective training, which may
not be available [9, 10]). The requirement for relatively
small labeled datasets can be especially advantageous
for semantic segmentation tasks as it can be expensive
and time consuming to generate pixel-wise annotations.
G-SHDL network is used to perform semantic segmentation on MSRC [14] and Stanford background (SB) [15]

datasets. The average segmentation accuracy for each class
for both datasets is presented. In addition, an extensive comparison of the proposed pipeline with other deep supervised
segmentation methods is demonstrated.
The paper is divided as follows: section 2 briefly presents
the proposed G-SHDL network, section 3 presents the experimental results while section 4 draws conclusions.
2. PROPOSED G-SHDL NETWORK
The Generative ScatterNet Hybrid Deep Learning Network
(G- SHDL) is detailed below. The first subsection explains the
mathematical formulation of the ScatterNet while the second
subsection presents the stacked RBM mid-section layers with
PCA structural priors that learn hierarchical features. The final sub-section explains the CRF supervised back-end that
uses the hierarchical features to produce the desired segmentation. The G-SHDL network is presented in Fig. 1.
2.1. DTCWT ScatterNet
The parametric log based DTCWT ScatterNet [16] is used
to extract the relatively symmetric translation invariant hand-

Fig. 2. The illustration shows the L6 RBM features thresholded
to the top 10, 20 and 30 activations and back-projected to the input
pixel space [18]. The L6 RBM features are most responsive to the
beaks of the birds, then feet and wings.

crafted features from the RBG input image.
Invariant features are obtained by filtering the input signal
x at the first layer (L1) with dual-tree complex wavelets [17,
28] λ1 = (j, r) at different scales (j) and six pre-defined orientations (r) fixed to 15◦ , 45◦ , 75◦ , 105◦ , 135◦ and 165◦ . To
build a more translation invariant representation, a point-wise
L 2 non-linearity (complex modulus) is applied to the real and
imaginary (a and b) of the filtered signal. The parametric log
transformation layer is then applied to all the oriented representations extracted at the first scale j = 1 with a parameter
kj=1 , to reduce the effect of outliers by introducing relative
symmetry to the pdf [16], as shown below
q
U 1[j] = log(U [j]+kj ), U [j] = |x ? ψλa1 |2 + |x ? ψλb 1 |2 ,
(1)
Next, a local average is computed on the envelope
|U 1[λm=1 ]| that aggregates the coefficients to build the desired translation- invariant representation:
S[λm=1 ] = |U 1[λm=1 ]| ? φ2J

(2)

The high frequency components lost due to smoothing
are retrieved by cascaded wavelet filtering performed at the
second layer (L2). The retrieved components are again not
transla- tion invariant so invariance is achieved by first applying the L2 non-linearity to obtain the regular envelope followed by a local-smoothing operator applied to the regular envelope (U 2[λm=1 , λm=2 ]) to obtain the desired second layer
(L2) coefficients with improved invariance:
S[λm=1 , λm=2 ] = |U 1[λm=1 ]| ? ψλ2 | ? φ2J
The scattering coefficients obtained at each layer are:


x ? φ2J (L0)

U 1[λm=1 ] ? φ2J (L1)
S=
|U 1[λm=1 ]| ? ψλ2 | ? φ2J (L2) j=(2,3,4,5...)

(3)

(4)

ScatterNet features have been found to improve learning
and generalization in deep supervised networks [29].
2.2. Unsupervised Learning: RBM with Priors
The Scattering features extracted at (L0, L1, L2) are concatenated and given as input to 4 stacked convolutional restricted

Fig. 3. Figure shows two images from MSRC dataset with their
ground truth and segmentation obtained at L2 to L6 of G-SHDL.

Boltzmann machine (RBM) layers that learn 200, 150, 100
and 50 filters respectively. The RBM is a generative stochastic neural network that learns a probability distribution over
the scattering features. Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)
sampling in the form of Gibbs sampling is used to approximate the likelihood and its gradient. The estimation of the
likelihood of the RBM or its gradient for inference is computationally intensive [19]. However, initializing RBMs with
priors on the hidden layer instead of a random initialization
has been shown to improve the training [19].
We propose structural priors for each convolutional RBM
layer (L3 to L6) which have been shown to improve the training of the RBMs (Fig. 1 Graphs). The Structural priors are
obtained using the PCANet [13] layer that learns a family of
orthonormal filters by minimizing the following reconstruction error:
min

V  Rz1 z2 ×K

X − V V TX

2
F

, s.t. V V T = IK

(5)

where X are patches sampled from N training images (concatenated handcrafted features), IK is an identity matrix of
size K ×K. The solution of eq. 5 in its simplified form represents K leading principal eigenvectors of XX T obtained using
Eigen decomposition. The PCA layers may learn undesired
checkerboard filters. In order to detect the checker-board filters from the learned filter set, we use the method defined
in [11]. These checkerboard filters are avoided as filter priors.
Each RBM layer (L3, L4, L5, L6) of the G-SHDL is trained
individually in a greedy fashion (with structural priors). Once
the RBM layer is trained the filters that learn redundant information are removed using 5 fold cross-validation. (Table 1
and section 3.2).
2.3. Supervised CRF Segmentation
Conditional Random Field (CRF) is a probabilistic graphical model that uses the features obtained from the L6 RBM
along with edge potentials computed on 4 pairwise connected
grids [20] to perform the desired segmentation. The segmentation is obtained by minimizing the clique loss function with
Tree-Reweighted [20] inference that uses the LBFGS optimization algorithm.

Table 1. 5 fold cross validation performed on the training dataset of
Stanford background (SB) dataset to select optimal filters for L3 to
L6 RBM layers. L(size) = No. of Filters (a, a is equivalent to a × a)
Filters
L3 (size)
43 (size)
L5 (size)
L6 (size)
PCA
200 (3,3) 150 (5,5) 100 (7,7) 50 (9,9)
RBM
200 (3,3) 150 (5,5) 100 (7,7) 50 (9,9)
Selected
139
110
83
47

3. OVERVIEW OF RESULTS
G-SHDL was evaluated and compared with other segmentation frameworks on both MSRC [14] and Stanford Background (SB) [15] datasets. The MSRC dataset contains 591
images with 21 classes while the SB dataset is formed of 715
images with 8 classes, where each image in both datasets has a
resolution of 320×240. The quantitative results are presented
with the class pixel accuracy which represents the ratio of correct pixels computed in a per-class (PA) [8] basis and then averaged over the total number of classes. The results are presented for 5-fold cross-validation for both datasets randomly
split into 45% training, 15% validation and 40% test images
for each fold. We provide a quantitative comparison against
the state-of-the-art to evaluate the performance of G-SHDL.
3.1. Handcrafted Front-end: ScatterNet
ScatterNet features are extracted from the input RGB image using DTCWT filters at 2 scales and 6 fixed orientations.
Next, log transformation with parameter kj=1 = 1.1 is applied
to the representations obtained at the finer scale to introduce
relative symmetry. (Section. 2.1).
3.2. Unsupervised Mid-section: RBM with PCA priors
The four stacked convolutional RBM layers learn 200, 150,
100 and 50 filters respectively with PCA structural priors (obtained by training on the handcrafted features) in a greedy
layer-wise fashion (Section 2.2). Once, each RBM layer is
trained, five-fold cross-validation (5-CV) is computed with
filters randomly selected from the trained filter set to evaluate the segmentation accuracies using CRF. We are able to
achieve similar PA accuracy on the 5-CV with the fewer number of filters than the complete learned filter set. This suggests
that some of the filters learn redundant information which can
be removed. This results in efficient learning of subsequent
layers as the filters are learned from a smaller feature space.
The numbers of selected filters are shown in Table. 1.
3.3. Classification performance and comparison
This section presents the classification performance of each
module of the G-SHDL network. The accuracy of the handcrafted module (HC) is computed on the concatenated relatively symmetric features extracted at L0, L1, L2, for both
resolutions (R1, R2) using CRF for segmentation on MSRC
dataset. The hand-crafted module produced a classification

accuracy of 68.4% (HC) as shown in Table. 2. An increase
of approximate 4%, 2%, 2% and 2% is observed when the
mid-level features, learned at L3, L4, L5 and L6 are used by
the CRF. This suggests that the RBM layers learn useful image representations as they improve the segmentation performance finally producing an accuracy of 78.21%.
Table 2. PA (%) on SB dataset for each module computed with
CRF. The increase in accuracy with the addition of each layer is also
shown. HC: Hand-crafted. RBM Layers: L3, L4, L5 and L6.

Dataset
Accuracy

HC
68.4

L3
72.3

L4
74.8

L5
76.7

L6
78.21

Next, the performance of the SHDL network is evaluated
on the MSRC dataset. The network results in a segmentation accuracy of 83.90%, as shown in Table. 3. The G-SHDL
outperformed the semi-supervised and unsupervised learning
methods on both datasets; however the network underperformed against supervised deep learning models [21, 22], as
shown in Table 3. The segmentation results for two images
from the MSRC dataset are shown in Fig. 3.
Table 3. PA (%) and comparison on both datasets. Unsup: Unsupervised, Semi: Semi-supervised and Sup: Supervised.
Dataset
G-SHDL
Semi
Unsup
SB [14]
78.21
77.76 [23] 68.1 [24]
MSRC [15]
83.90
83.6 [26] 74.7 [27]

Sup

80.2 [25]
89.0 [22]

3.4. Advantage over Deep Supervised Networks
Deep Supervised models need large labeled datasets for training which may not exist for most application. Table 4 shows
that our G-SHDL network outperformed the recurrent CNN
of [25] on the SB dataset with less than 300 images due to
poor ability of rCNNs to train on small training datasets. The
experiments were performed by dividing the training dataset
into 8 datasets of different sizes. It is made sure that an equal
number of images per object class were sampled from the
training dataset. The full test set was used for all experiment.
Table 4. Comparison of G-SHDL on PA (%) with Recurrent CNN
(rCNN) [25] against different training dataset sizes on SB dataset.
Arch.
50
100
200
300
400
500
572
G-SHDL 40.3 59.9 66.4
72.6 75.7 78.20 78.21
rCNN
15.6 34.5 41.1 66.9 76.2 79.87
80.2

4. CONCLUSION
The paper proposes a generative G-SHDL network for semantic image segmentation that is faster to train and computationally efficient. The network uses PCA based structural priors
that accerlate the training of (otherwise slow) RBMs. The network has been shown to outperform unsupervised and semisupervised learning methods while evidence of the advantage
of G-SHDL network over supervised learning (rCNN) methods is presented for small training datasets.

5. REFERENCES
[1] A. Valada, G.L. Oliveira, T. Brox, and W. Burgard,
“Deep multispectral semantic scene understanding of
forested environments using multimodal fusions,” International Symposium on Experimental Robotics, 2016.
[2] Amarjot Singh, D Hazarika, and A Bhattacharya, “Texture and structure incorporated scatternet hybrid deep
learning network (TS-SHDL) for brain matter segmentation,” IEEE International Conference on Computer
Vision Workshop (ICCVW), 2017.
[3] O. Miksik et al., “The semantic paintbrush: Interactive
3d mapping and recognition in large outdoor spaces,”
33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems, 2015.
[4] Sandeep Nadella et al., “Aerial Scene Understanding using Deep Wavelet Scat- tering Network and Conditional
Random Field,” European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) workshops, 2016.
[5] X. He, R. Zemel, and M. Carreira-Perpindn, “Multiscale
conditional random fields for image labeling,” IEEE
CVPR, 2004.
[6] J. Long, E. Shelhamer, and T. Darrell, “Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation,” CoRR,
abs/1411.4038, 2014.
[7] Li et al., “Weakly supervised RBM for semantic segmentation,” International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2015.
[8] Garcia-Garcia et al., “A review on deep learning
techniques applied to semantic segmentation,” CoRR,
abs/1704.06857, 2017.
[9] S. Jain et al., “A novel method to improve model fitting
for stock market prediction,” International Journal of
Research in Business and Technology, 2013.
[10] Yu et al., “Unsupervised image segmentation via
stacked denoising auto-encoder and hierarchical patch
indexing,” Signal Processing, 2018.
[11] Geiger et al., “Automatic camera and range sensor calibration using a single shot,” IEEE ICRA, 2012.
[12] Amarjot Singh and Nick Kingsbury, “Scatternet Hybrid
Deep learning (SHDL) Network For Object Classification,” IEEE International Workshop on Machine Learning for Signal Processing (MLSP), 2017.
[13] TH Chan et al., “Pcanet: A simple deep learning baseline for image classification?,” ArXiv:1404.3606, 2014.

[14] J. Shotton et al., “Textonboost: Joint appearance, shape
and context modeling for multi-class object recognition
and segmentation,” ECCV, 2006.
[15] S. Gould, R. Fulton, and D. Koller, “Decomposing
a scene into geometric and semantically consistent regions,” IEEE ICCV, 2009.
[16] A. Singh and N.G. Kingsbury, “Dual-tree wavelet scattering network with parametric log transformation for
object classification,” IEEE ICASSP, 2017.
[17] N.G. Kingsbury, “Complex wavelets for shift invariant
analysis and filtering of signals,” Applied and computational harmonic analysis, vol. 10, pp. 234 - 253, 2001.
[18] Zeiler et al., “Visualizing and understanding convolutional networks,” Arxiv: 1311.2901, 2013.
[19] Montavon et al., “In neural networks: Tricks of the
trade,” Springer, 2012.
[20] Justin Domke, “Learning graphical model parameters
with approximate marginal inference,” IEEE PAMI,
2013.
[21] Jin et al., “Multi-path feedback recurrent neural networks for scene parsing,” AAAI, 2017.
[22] Liu et al., “Discriminative training of deep fullyconnected continuous crfs with task-specific loss,”
Arxiv:1601.07649, 2016.
[23] Souly et al., “Semi supervised semantic segmentation
using generative adversarial network,” ICCV, 2017.
[24] Coates et al., “Learning feature representations with kmeans,” NIPS, 2010.
[25] Collobert et al., “Recurrent convolutional neural networks for scene parsing,” IDIAP Report, 2013.
[26] Liu et al., “Semi-supervised node splitting for random
forest construction,” IEEE CVPR, 2013.
[27] Rubinstein et al., “Unsupervised joint object discovery
and segmentation in internet images,” CVPR, 2013.
[28] Amarjot Singh and Nick Kingsbury, “Multi-Resolution
Dual-Tree Wavelet Scattering Network for Signal Classification,” ArXiv:1702.03345, 2017.
[29] Amarjot Singh and Nick Kingsbury, “Efficient Convolutional Network Learning using Parametric Log based
Dual-Tree Wavelet ScatterNet,” IEEE International
Conference on Computer Vision Workshop (ICCVW),
2017.

