\documentclass[a4paper]{article}
	% To compile PDF run: latexmk -pdf {filename}.tex

	\usepackage{graphicx}				% Used to insert images into the paper
	\usepackage{float}
	\usepackage[justification=centering]{caption}	% Used for captions
	\captionsetup[figure]{font=small}	% Makes captions small
	\newcommand\tab[1][0.5cm]{\hspace*{#1}}		% Defines a new command to use 'tab' in text
	% Math package
	\usepackage{amsmath}
	% Enable that parameters of \cref{}, \ref{}, \cite{}, ... are linked so that a reader can click on the number an jump to the target in the document
	\usepackage{hyperref}
	%enable \cref{...} and \Cref{...} instead of \ref: Type of reference included in the link
	\usepackage[capitalise,nameinlink]{cleveref}
	% UTF-8 encoding
	\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
	\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} %support umlauts in the input
	% Easier compilation
	\usepackage{bookmark}
	\usepackage{natbib}

	\usepackage{xcolor}
	\newcommand{\todo}[1]{\marginpar{{\textsf{TODO}}}{\textbf{\color{red}[#1]}}}

	\begin{document}
		\title{What is Waldo?}
		\author{Kelvin Davis \and Jip J. Dekker \and Anthony Silvestere}
		\maketitle

		\begin{abstract}
%
		The famous brand of picture puzzles ``Where's Waldo?'' relates well to many
		unsolved image classification problem. This offers us the opportunity to
		test different image classification methods on a data set that is both small
		enough to compute in a reasonable time span and easy for humans to
		understand. In this report we compare the well known machine learning
		methods Naive Bayes, Support Vector Machines, $k$-Nearest Neighbors, and
		Random Forest against the Neural Network Architectures LeNet, Fully
		Convolutional Neural Networks, and Fully Convolutional Neural Networks.
		\todo{I don't like this big summation but I think it is the important
		information}
		Our comparison shows that \todo{...}
%
		\end{abstract}

		\section{Introduction}

		Almost every child around the world knows about ``Where's Waldo?'', also
		known as ``Where's Wally?'' in some countries. This famous puzzle book has
		spread its way across the world and is published in more than 25 different
		languages. The idea behind the books is to find the character ``Waldo'',
		shown in \Cref{fig:waldo}, in the different pictures in the book. This is,
		however, not as easy as it sounds. Every picture in the book is full of tiny
		details and Waldo is only one out of many. The puzzle is made even harder by
		the fact that Waldo is not always fully depicted, sometimes it is just his
		head or his torso popping out from behind something else. Lastly, the reason
		that even adults will have trouble spotting Waldo is the fact that the
		pictures are full of ``Red Herrings'': things that look like (or are colored
		as) Waldo, but are not actually Waldo.

		\begin{figure}[ht]
			\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{waldo}
			\centering
			\caption{
				A headshot of the character ``Waldo'', or ``Wally''. Pictures of Waldo
				copyrighted by Martin Handford and are used under the fair-use policy.
			}
			\label{fig:waldo}
		\end{figure}

		The task of finding Waldo is something that relates to a lot of real life
		image recognition tasks. Fields like mining, astronomy, surveillance,
		radiology, and microbiology often have to analyse images (or scans) to find
		the tiniest details, sometimes undetectable by the human eye. These tasks
		are especially hard when the thing(s) you are looking for are similar to the
		rest of the images. These tasks are thus generally performed using computers
		to identify possible matches.

		``Where's Waldo?'' offers us a great tool to study this kind of problem in a
		setting that is humanly tangible. In this report we will try to identify
		Waldo in the puzzle images using different classification methods. Every
		image will be split into different segments and every segment will have to
		be classified as either being ``Waldo'' or ``not Waldo''. We will compare
		various different classification methods from more classical machine
		learning, like naive Bayes classifiers, to the currently state of the art,
		Neural Networks. In \Cref{sec:background} we will introduce the different
		classification methods, \Cref{sec:method} will explain the way in which
		these methods are trained and how they will be evaluated, in
		\Cref{sec:results} will discuss the results, and \Cref{sec:conclusion} will
		offer our final conclusions.

		\section{Background} \label{sec:background}

		The classification methods used can separated into two separate groups:
		classical machine learning methods and neural network architectures. Many of
		the classical machine learning algorithms have variations and improvements
		for various purposes; however, for this report we will be using their only
		their basic versions. In contrast, we will use different neural network
		architectures, as this method is currently the most used for image
		classification.

		\subsection{Classical Machine Learning Methods}

		The following paragraphs will give only brief descriptions of the different
		classical machine learning methods used in this reports. For further reading
		we recommend reading ``Supervised machine learning: A review of
		classification techniques'' \cite{Kotsiantis2007}.

		\paragraph{Naive Bayes Classifier}

		\cite{naivebayes}

		\paragraph{$k$-Nearest Neighbors}

		($k$-NN) \cite{knn} is one of the simplest machine learning algorithms. It
		classifies a new instance based on its ``distance'' to the known instances.
		It will find the $k$ closest instances to the new instance and assign the
		new instance the class that the majority of the $k$ closest instances has.
		The method has to be configured in several ways:  the number of $k$, the
		distance measure, and (depending on $k$) a tie breaking measure all have to
		be chosen.

		\paragraph{Support Vector Machine}

		\cite{svm}

		\paragraph{Random Forest}

		\cite{randomforest}

		\subsection{Neural Network Architectures}
		\todo{Did we only do the three in the end? (Alexnet?)}

		\paragraph{Convolutional Neural Networks}

		\paragraph{LeNet}

		\paragraph{Fully Convolutional Neural Networks}


		\section{Method} \label{sec:method}

    % Kelvin Start
    \subsection{Benchmarking}\label{benchmarking}

    In order to benchmark the Neural Networks, the performance of these
    algorithms are evaluated against other Machine Learning algorithms. We
    use Support Vector Machines, K-Nearest Neighbours (\(K=5\)), Gaussian
    Naive Bayes and Random Forest classifiers, as provided in Scikit-Learn.

    \subsection{Performance Metrics}\label{performance-metrics}

    To evaluate the performance of the models, we record the time taken by
    each model to train, based on the training data and statistics about the
    predictions the models make on the test data. These prediction
    statistics include:

    \begin{itemize}
    \item
      \textbf{Accuracy:}
      \[a = \dfrac{|correct\ predictions|}{|predictions|} = \dfrac{tp + tn}{tp + tn + fp + fn}\]
    \item
      \textbf{Precision:}
      \[p = \dfrac{|Waldo\ predicted\ as\ Waldo|}{|predicted\ as\ Waldo|} = \dfrac{tp}{tp + fp}\]
    \item
      \textbf{Recall:}
      \[r = \dfrac{|Waldo\ predicted\ as\ Waldo|}{|actually\ Waldo|} = \dfrac{tp}{tp + fn}\]
    \item
      \textbf{F1 Measure:} \[f1 = \dfrac{2pr}{p + r}\] where \(tp\) is the
      number of true positives, \(tn\) is the number of true negatives,
      \(fp\) is the number of false positives, and \(tp\) is the number of
      false negatives.
    \end{itemize}

    Accuracy is a common performance metric used in Machine Learning,
    however in classification problems where the training data is heavily
    biased toward one category, sometimes a model will learn to optimize its
    accuracy by classifying all instances as one category. I.e. the
    classifier will classify all images that do not contain Waldo as not
    containing Waldo, but will also classify all images containing Waldo as
    not containing Waldo. Thus we use, other metrics to measure performance
    as well.

    \emph{Precision} returns the percentage of classifications of Waldo that
    are actually Waldo. \emph{Recall} returns the percentage of Waldos that
    were actually predicted as Waldo. In the case of a classifier that
    classifies all things as Waldo, the recall would be 0. \emph{F1-Measure}
    returns a combination of precision and recall that heavily penalises
    classifiers that perform poorly in either precision or recall.
    % Kelvin End

		\section{Results} \label{sec:results}

		\section{Conclusion} \label{sec:conclusion}

		\bibliographystyle{alpha}
		\bibliography{references}

	\end{document}
