| Keywords | 
        
            | Content-based image retrieval (CBIR) ,Quantized histogram, SVM Classifier, Relevance Feedback. | 
        
            | INTRODUCTION | 
        
            | Human perception is more likely towards images rather than text. Currently in the field of modern communication       system, visual communication plays an important role. In internet the vast storage space has to be effectively managed       by storing the images in a compressed form. For handling the vast amount of image collection, the necessity for       effective retrieval came into account. Therefore effective image retrieval is still an open challenge. In general there are       three basic techniques for image retrieval they are text-based, content-based and semantic-based. In text-based image       retrieval, the retrieval process requires the textual description and annotation that makes the retrieval process tedious       and time-consuming. | 
        
            | CBIR [10] plays an active role in the field of research for producing effective image retrieval. They are effectively       boosted by combining it with the relevance feedback mechanism. The CBIR is performed in two stages. The basic       stage is known as indexing in which the features of images are being extracted and they are stored in the feature       database. Initially the images are decoded from compressed [4] domain to pixel domain to extract the low level       features. The next stage is known as searching in which user query images feature vector is compared to retrieve the       similar images available in the feature database. Since the extraction of features is tedious in compressed domain we go       for Discrete Cosine Transformation [1][2] which is a part of image compression. In the compressed process the DCT       removes little information from the image and allow the accessible information behind which helps in effective image       retrieval. | 
        
            | This leads to CBIR [7][8] in which textual description is avoided and low-level features has been analyzed for       making faster computation. The semantic gap between low-level features [2] and high-level concepts handled by the       user in image retrieval needs to achieve reasonable solutions for effective retrieval especially in compressed domain.       This is achieved by inculcating various distance metrics which are used to measure similarities using texture features       and also various distance metrics is performed in every individual quantization bins. | 
        
            | In the initial stage the image is being converted from RGB to YUV color model and then they are divided into 8x8       DCT blocks using DC and AC coefficients. These blocks are then used to extract the texture feature using YUV color       model in which the images is split into four blocks and they Y component in each block is transformed into DCT coefficients to get vertical, horizontal and diagonal texture features in all blocks for effective representation. The       texture features from the image are being extracted in compressed domain by computing mean and standard deviation       using DCT coefficient. This result is used to form the feature vector to retrieve similar images.In this paper the major       concern is about utilizing the quantized histogram statistical texture feature effectively by matching the query image       with the database image using various distance metrics of the DCT domain. After the effective feature extraction they       are being quantized into different number of bins. The performance is analyzed and the resultant image is being       displayed. | 
        
            | The Manhattan Distance (L1 metric) gives the high performance in terms of precision among various technique       such as the Euclidean Distance (L2 metric) and the Vector Cosine Angle Distance (VCAD) to measure the distance for       similarity between query image and the images available in the image database. In this method the comparison methods       are done in two types. First the distance metrics measures the difference between the two vectors of images and the       similarity is determined by the small difference between them. In the similarity measure metrics, the similarity       between the two vectors of images and a large similarity means the two images are closely similar to each other. | 
        
            | In the proposed work this retrieved similar images is given to the SVM classifier [7] which classifies the output into       relevant and irrelevant images. Finally the user feedback is taken into account by considering the retrieved relevant       images from the SVM classifier to obtain the most precise output. This proposed technique is being elaborated in the       following sections. | 
        
            | BACKGROUND METHODOLOGY | 
        
            | A. Feature Extraction | 
        
            | Feature extraction [8] is the basis of content based image retrieval. Typically two types of visual feature in CBIR: | 
        
            | 1) Primitive features which include color, texture and shape. | 
        
            | 2) Domain specific which are application specific and may include, for example human faces and finger prints. | 
        
            | B. Histogram quantization | 
        
            | The histogram of the DC is defined as the frequencies of the DC coefficients and the histogram of the AC is       the frequencies of the AC coefficients in all the blocks. The DC histogrameq(1) is then quantized into L bins such that: | 
        
            |  | 
        
            | where h(bi)DC is the frequency of the DC coefficients in bin biand HDC is the histogram of the L bins.       The histograms for the AC coefficients are eq(2-4) also quantized into L bins such that: | 
        
            |  | 
        
            |  | 
        
            |  | 
        
            | whereh(bi)AC 1, h(bi)AC 2 and h(bi)AC 3 are the frequencies and HAC 1, HAc 2 and HAC 3are the histograms of AC1, AC2       and AC3 coefficients using the quantization of the L bins. | 
        
            | PROPOSED SYSTEM | 
        
            | A. Image Segmentation | 
        
            | The initial stage of my system is to convert RGB input images to YUV color model. This color model helps in       effective retrieval of images in a compressed domain [5]. After the conversion of the color model they are being       compressed in order to store it effectively. During the compression DCT technique is being used in order to segment       the given image into 8x8 block transformation | 
        
            | B. Feature Extraction | 
        
            | The next stage after segmentation is that, considering 2x2 blocks to identify the histogram for effective retrieval.       Each block is considered as four co-efficient namely DC, AC1, AC2 and AC3. DC components are considered as the       energy component and other AC components are taken into consideration while constructing the feature vector. Then       the identified histograms are quantized into 8, 16 and 32 histogram quantization bins. Finally the texture feature is       computed in each histogram and the feature vector [6] is constructed. The stastical texture features like mean and       standard deviations are computed. | 
        
            | Let P(b) be the probability distribution eq(5) of bin b in each of the histograms | 
        
            |  | 
        
            | where M is total number of blocks | 
        
            | The mean eq(6) is the average of intensity values of all bins of the four quantized histograms. It describes the       brightness of the image (Szabolcs, 2008; Selvarajah and Kodituwakku, 2011) and can be calculated as | 
        
            |  | 
        
            | The standard deviation eq (7) measures the distribution of intensity values about the mean in all blocks of       histograms. The calculated value of standard deviation shows low or high contrast of histograms in images with low or       high values (Selvarajah and Kodituwakku., 2011; Thawari and Janwe, 2011) and is calculated as: | 
        
            |  | 
        
            | C. Similarity Measure | 
        
            | In this phase the CBIR system identifies the similarities between images by using distance metrics. This distance       metricseq(8-11) which are considered in my work are the sum of absolute difference (SAD), the sum of squared of       absolute differences (SSAD), Euclidean distance and city block distance (Manhattan distance). They measure the       similarity between the query image and the image available in the database. The small difference between the two       feature vector indicates the large similarity and vice versa. | 
        
            | 1) Sum of Absolute Difference (SAD): The sum of absolute difference (SAD)3eq(8) is a very straightforward distance       metric and extensively used for computing the distance between the images in CBIR to get the similarity. In this metric       the sum of the differences of the absolute values of the two feature vectors are calculated (Selvarajah and Kodituwakku,       2011). The similarity is decided on the computed value of distance. This distance metric can be calculated as: | 
        
            |  | 
        
            | Where n is the number of features, i= 1, 2. . ., n. Both images are the same for Δd = 0 and the small value of Δd shows       the relevant image to the query image. | 
        
            | 2) Sum of Squared Absolute Difference (SSAD): In this metric the sum of the squared differences of absolute       valueseq(9) of the two feature vectors are calculated. This distance metric can be calculated (Selvarajah and       Kodiyuwakku, 2011) as: | 
        
            |  | 
        
            | 3) Euclidean distance:This distance metric eq(10) is most commonly used for similarity measurement in image       retrieval because of its efficiency and effectiveness. It measures the distance between two vectors of images by       calculating the square root of the sum of the squared absolute differences and it can be calculated (Szabolcs, 2008) as: | 
        
            |  *) (10) | 
        
            | 4) City block distance:This distance metriceq(11) is also called the Manhattan distance. The city block distance metric       has robustness to outliers. This distance metric is computed by the sum of absolute differences between two feature       vectors of images and can be calculated (Szabolcs, 2008) as: | 
        
            |  (11) | 
        
            | D. SVM Classifier | 
        
            | Support Vector Machines [7] are a set of related supervised learning method used for classification and regression       SVM predicts that the new image falls into one category or the other. In out method this classifier is used to classify the       images into relevant and non-relevant images from the set of retrieved output images. | 
        
            | E. Relevance Feedback | 
        
            | The technique used for relevance feedback is the random walks in which they depend upon the random walker       algorithm [3]. This technique uses the classified relevant images as the input and gets user feedback into account for       generating the most precious output. They also have some iteration until the user gets their required output. | 
        
            | F. Proposed Algorithm | 
        
            | Step 1: Initially, user query images and images from the image collection is seeded as the input. | 
        
            | Step 2: In the next level, the RGB color images are converted to YUV color model | 
        
            | Step 3: Then the DCT block transformation is being carried out as one of the image compression technique. | 
        
            | Step 4: Then histogram identification of DC, AC1, AC2, AC3 co-efficient is applied in all the blocks | 
        
            | Step 5: The identified histogram are quantized into 8, 16 and 32 histogram quantized bins. | 
        
            | Step 6: Texture feature is computed in each histogram and the feature vector is constructed. | 
        
            | Step 7: CBIR system identifies the similarities (similarity measure) between the images using distance metrics. | 
        
            | Step 8: System retrieves the set of images for the given query image on which SVM classifier is used to       classify the images into relevant and non-relevant images | 
        
            | Step 9: On the set of retrieved relevant images, user is going to give feedback to find the most precious output       and return back to step 6. | 
        
            | Step 10: If the feedback is satisfactory, then system retrieves user required image set. If not the feedback       process is iterated. | 
        
            | EXPERIMENTAL RESULT | 
        
            | The coral dataset is being used to test the improvised performance of the proposed system, which is available for       researchers. The image database consists of 14,500 images having 55 categories each of which has approximately 260       images. The sample categories are Chihuahua, Pekinese, Shih-Tzu, Papillion, Basset, Beagle, Bluetick and Redbone.       All the above mentioned and 55 specified categories are used for the experiment. All the images are initially stored in       RGB color space in compressed format. They are approximately compressed to 2KB effectively using DCT       transformation which helps in retaining of useful information for effective extraction. | 
        
            | A. Metrics Measurements | 
        
            | The rapid change in development of the technology people are now more attracted to images rather than text       documents therefore currently storage of huge amount of images in the databases is a big challenge. This is being       overcome by the one of the effective image compression technique known as Discrete Cosine Transformation(DCT) in       which even after compression the useful information are being retained. This paves ways for effective extraction of       features from the DCT block of images. The similarity between the query image feature vector and the feature vector       available on the feature database are being compared using precision metrics which is considered to be one of the       important techniques. | 
        
            | 1) Precision:The precision in image retrieval determines the amount of relevant images retrieved from the total number       of retrieved images for the given query image. | 
        
            | Precision = Relevant image retrieved / Retrieved image | 
        
            | Table 1 shows the average precision of sample image categories in different quantized histogram bins using city       block (Manhattan) distance which is considered to be the most precious metrics in terms of precision. It explains by the       value that there is an improvement when the number of bins increases and which reaches the maximum when the bin       value reaches 32 which show an average of 91% and the overall percentage achieved is 90%, which records the better       performance. Fig 2 shows the graphical representation of the value in the table present | 
        
            | CONCLUSION | 
        
            | The CBIR method which is proposed is based on the performance analysis of various distance metrics using the       quantized histogram statistical texture features in the DCT domain. The similarity measurement is performed by using       four distance metrics. The experimental results are analyzed on the basis of four distance metrics separately using       different quantized histogram bins and we conclude that the city block metrics gives better performance in terms of       precision. Finally, our method is compared with other distance metrics for verification under different quantized bins       which shows increase in the performance. | 
        
            | Tables at a glance | 
        
            | 
                
                    
                        |  |  
                        | Table 1 |  | 
        
            | Figures at a glance | 
        
            | 
                
                    
                        |  |  
                        | Figure 1 |  | 
        
            | References | 
        
            | 
                Fazal Malik , BaharumBaharudinAnalysis of distance metrics in content-based  image retrieval using statistical quantized histogram texturefeatures in the  DCT domain computer and Information Sciences Department, UniversitiTeknologi  PETRONAS, Malaysia.
 Hee-Jung Bae, Sung-Hwan Jung, 1997. Image retrieval using texture  based on dct. international conference on information, communications and  signal processing ICICS 97, Singapore, 9–12.
 Samual Rota Bulo , Massimo Rabbi , Marcello Pelillo. Content based  image retrieval with relevance feedback using Random walks. PatternRecognition  44 (2012).
 Shan, Zhao, Liu, Yan-Xia, 2009. Research on JPEG Image  Retrieval.5th International Conference on Wireless Communications,  Networkingand Mobile. Computing 16 (1), 1–4.Suresh, P., Sundaram, R.M.D.,  Arumugam, A., 2008. Feature.
 Francesc J. Ferri ,Mohanaiah, Extraction in Compressed Domain for  Content Based Image Retrieval. IEEE International Conference onAdvanced  Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), pp. 190–194.
 Edmund Y. Lam, Member, IEEE, and Joseph W. Goodman, A Mathematical  Analysis of the DCT Coefficient Distributions for Images Fellow,IEEE IEEE  TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING, VOL. 9, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2008.
 ElaYildizer. A New Approach for CBIR Feedback based Image Classifier  International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)Volume 14– No.4,  January 2011.
 S. Nandagopalan, Dr. B. S. Adiga, and N. Deepak “A Universal Model  for Content- Based Image Retrieval “Proceedings of World Academy ofScience,  Engineering and Technology, 36 December 2008, ISSN 2070-3740.
 ZurinaMuda, Paul H. Lewis, Terry R. Payne, Mark J. Weal. “Enhanced  Image Annotations Based on Spatial Information Extraction andOntologies”. In  Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Signal and Image Processing  Application, ICSIPA 2009.
 Remco, C., Veltkamp, MirelaTanase, 2002. content-based image  retrieval systems: a survey.
 |