Enhancing deephashing with graph filters and autoencoder-based embeddings


Abstract

Deephashing has emerged as an efficient and robust solution for image retrieval through representation learning. However, CNN-based hashing methods are constrained by their reliance on grid structures, limiting their capacity to model complex or unstructured data relationships. This paper proposes a novel deephashing model that integrates transfer learning–based visual embeddings, obtained via an autoencoder, with graph convolutional networks (GCNs). The model dynamically constructs local subgraphs from the output of a transfer model, enabling the learning of both global and local structural relationships through the graph Laplacian. A GCN layer is employed to effectively capture local topologies in unstructured data, enhancing both representation quality and learning efficiency through parameter sharing and transfer learning. Experiments conducted on the evaluation datasets demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms existing CNN-based and GCN-based deephashing approaches. Furthermore, the analysis of various GCN filters under the proposed framework offers valuable insights into filter selection for deephashing. Ultimately, GCN filters contribute to structural preservation and improved expressiveness, while the combination of dynamic graph construction and transfer learning facilitates the generation of compact, robust hash codes from high-dimensional image data.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].