Improving Handwritten Cyrillic OCR by Font-Based Synthetic Text Generator
Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), ISSN: 1611-3349, Vol: 14321 LNCS, Page: 102-115
2024
- 2Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Captures2
- Readers2
Conference Paper Description
In this paper, we propose a straight-forward and effective Font-based Synthetic Text Generator (FbSTG) to alleviate the need for annotated data required for not just Cyrillic handwritten text recognition. Unlike standard GAN-based methods, the FbSTG does not have to be trained to learn new characters and styles; all it needs is the fonts, the text, and sampled page backgrounds. In order to show the benefits of the newly proposed method, we train and test two different OCR systems (Tesseract, and TrOCR) on the Handwritten Kazakh and Russian dataset (HKR) both with and without synthetic data. Besides, we evaluate both systems’ performance on a private NKVD dataset containing historical documents from Ukraine with a high amount of out-of-vocabulary (OoV) words representing an extremely challenging task for current state-of-the-art methods. We decreased the CER and WER significantly by adding the synthetic data with the TrOCR-Base-384 model on both datasets. More precisely, we reduced the relative error in terms of CER/WER on (i) HKR-Test1 with OoV samples by around 20 % / 10 %, and (ii) NKVD dataset by 24 % CER and 8 % WER. The FbSTG code is available at: https://github.com/mhlzcu/doc_gen.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85181979766&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50320-7_8; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-031-50320-7_8; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50320-7_8; https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-50320-7_8
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know