Image Style Transfer Using Convolutional Neural Networks
Leon A. Gatys
Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, University of Tübingen, Germany
Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience, Tübingen, Germany
Graduate School of Neural Information Processing, University of Tübingen, Germany
leon.gatys@bethgelab.org

Alexander S. Ecker
Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, University of Tübingen, Germany
Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience, Tübingen, Germany
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany
Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
Matthias Bethge
Centre for Integrative Neuroscience, University of Tübingen, Germany
Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience, Tübingen, Germany
Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany

Abstract
Rendering the semantic content of an image in different
styles is a difficult image processing task. Arguably, a major
limiting factor for previous approaches has been the lack ofimage representations that explicitly represent semantic information and, thus, allow to separate image content fromstyle. Here we use image representations derived from Convolutional Neural Networks optimised for object recognition, which make high level image information explicit. We
introduce A Neural Algorithm of Artistic Style that can separate and recombine the image content and style of natural
images. The algorithm allows us to produce new images ofhigh perceptual quality that combine the content of an arbitrary photograph with the appearance of numerous wellknown artworks. Our results provide new insights into thedeep image representations learned by Convolutional Neural Networks and demonstrate their potential for high level
image synthesis and manipulation.

1. Introduction
Transferring the style from one image onto another canbe considered a problem of texture transfer. In texture transfer the goal is to synthesise a texture from a source image
while constraining the texture synthesis in order to preserve
the semantic content of a target image. For texture synthesis

there exist a large range of powerful non-parametric algorithms that can synthesise photorealistic natural textures byresampling the pixels of a given source texture [7, 30, 8, 20].
Most previous texture transfer algorithms rely on these nonparametric methods for texture synthesis while using different ways to preserve the structure of the target image. For
instance, Efros and Freeman introduce a correspondence
map that includes features of the target image such as image intensity to constrain the texture synthesis procedure[8]. Hertzman et al. use image analogies to transfer the texture from an already stylised image onto a target image[13].
Ashikhmin focuses on transferring the high-frequency texture information while preserving the coarse scale of thetarget image [1]. Lee et al. improve this algorithm by additionally informing the texture transfer with edge orientation
information [22].
Although these algorithms achieve remarkable results,
they all suffer from the same fundamental limitation: theyuse only low-level image features of the target image to inform the texture transfer. Ideally, however, a style transfer
algorithm should be able to extract the semantic image content from the target image (e.g. the objects and the generalscenery) and then inform a texture transfer procedure to render the semantic content of the target image in the style ofthe source image. Therefore, a fundamental prerequisite is
to find image representations that independently model variations in the semantic image content and the style in which
12414

a

b

c

d

e

Style Reconstructions

Style
Representations

Input image
Content
Representations
Convolutional Neural Network

a

b

c

d

e

Content Reconstructions

Figure 1. Image representations in a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN). A given input image is represented as a set of filtered images
at each processing stage in the CNN. While the number of different filters increases along the processing hierarchy, the size of the filteredimages is reduced by some downsampling mechanism (e.g. max-pooling) leading to a decrease in the total number of units per layer of the
network. Content Reconstructions. We can visualise the information at different processing stages in the CNN by reconstructing the input
image from only knowing the network’s responses in a particular layer. We reconstruct the input image from from layers ‘conv1 2’ (a),‘conv2 2’ (b), ‘conv3 2’ (c), ‘conv4 2’ (d) and ‘conv5 2’ (e) of the original VGG-Network. We find that reconstruction from lower layers isalmost perfect (a–c). In higher layers of the network, detailed pixel information is lost while the high-level content of the image is preserved(d,e). Style Reconstructions. On top of the original CNN activations we use a feature space that captures the texture information of an
input image. The style representation computes correlations between the different features in different layers of the CNN. We reconstruct
the style of the input image from a style representation built on different subsets of CNN layers ( ‘conv1 1’ (a), ‘conv1 1’ and ‘conv2 1’(b), ‘conv1 1’, ‘conv2 1’ and ‘conv3 1’ (c), ‘conv1 1’, ‘conv2 1’, ‘conv3 1’ and ‘conv4 1’ (d), ‘conv1 1’, ‘conv2 1’, ‘conv3 1’, ‘conv4 1’and ‘conv5 1’ (e). This creates images that match the style of a given image on an increasing scale while discarding information of the
global arrangement of the scene.

it is presented. Such factorised representations were previously achieved only for controlled subsets of natural images such as faces under different illumination conditions
and characters in different font styles [29] or handwritten
digits and house numbers [17].
To generally separate content from style in natural images is still an extremely difficult problem. However, the recent advance of Deep Convolutional Neural Networks [18]has produced powerful computer vision systems that learn
to extract high-level semantic information from natural images. It was shown that Convolutional Neural Networks

trained with sufficient labeled data on specific tasks suchas object recognition learn to extract high-level image content in generic feature representations that generalise acrossdatasets [6] and even to other visual information processing
tasks [19, 4, 2, 9, 23], including texture recognition [5] andartistic style classification [15].
In this work we show how the generic feature representations learned by high-performing Convolutional Neural
Networks can be used to independently process and manipulate the content and the style of natural images. We
introduce A Neural Algorithm of Artistic Style, a new algo2415

rithm to perform image style transfer. Conceptually, it is a
texture transfer algorithm that constrains a texture synthesis method by feature representations from state-of-the-art
Convolutional Neural Networks. Since the texture model isalso based on deep image representations, the style transfer
method elegantly reduces to an optimisation problem within
a single neural network. New images are generated by performing a pre-image search to match feature representationsof example images. This general approach has been used
before in the context of texture synthesis [12, 25, 10] and to
improve the understanding of deep image representations[27, 24]. In fact, our style transfer algorithm combines aparametric texture model based on Convolutional Neural
Networks [10] with a method to invert their image representations [24].

2. Deep image representations
The results presented below were generated on the basis of the VGG network [28], which was trained to perform
object recognition and localisation [26] and is described extensively in the original work [28]. We used the feature
space provided by a normalised version of the 16 convolutional and 5 pooling layers of the 19-layer VGG network.
We normalized the network by scaling the weights such thatthe mean activation of each convolutional filter over images
and positions is equal to one. Such re-scaling can be done
for the VGG network without changing its output, because
it contains only rectifying linear activation functions and nonormalization or pooling over feature maps. We do not use
any of the fully connected layers. The model is publicly
available and can be explored in the caffe-framework [14].
For image synthesis we found that replacing the maximum
pooling operation by average pooling yields slightly more
appealing results, which is why the images shown were generated with average pooling.

2.1. Content representation
Generally each layer in the network defines a non-linear
filter bank whose complexity increases with the position of
the layer in the network. Hence a given input image ~x is
encoded in each layer of the Convolutional Neural Networkby the filter responses to that image. A layer with Nl distinct filters has Nl feature maps each of size Ml , where Ml
is the height times the width of the feature map. So the responses in a layer l can be stored in a matrix F l ∈ RNl ×Ml
where Fijl is the activation of the ith filter at position j inlayer l.
To visualise the image information that is encoded at
different layers of the hierarchy one can perform gradientdescent on a white noise image to find another image thatmatches the feature responses of the original image (Fig 1,
content reconstructions) [24]. Let p~ and ~x be the original
image and the image that is generated, and P l and F l theirrespective feature representation in layer l. We then define
the squared-error loss between the two feature representations
2
1X l
Fij − Pijl.
(1)
Lcontent (~p, ~x, l) =2 i,j
The derivative of this loss with respect to the activations inlayer l equals(F l − P l ij if Fijl > 0∂Lcontent
=
(2)
∂Fijl
0
if Fijl < 0 ,from which the gradient with respect to the image ~x canbe computed using standard error back-propagation (Fig 2,
right). Thus we can change the initially random image ~x
until it generates the same response in a certain layer of theConvolutional Neural Network as the original image p~.
When Convolutional Neural Networks are trained on object recognition, they develop a representation of the image
that makes object information increasingly explicit along
the processing hierarchy [10]. Therefore, along the processing hierarchy of the network, the input image is transformed
into representations that are increasingly sensitive to the actual content of the image, but become relatively invariant to
its precise appearance. Thus, higher layers in the network
capture the high-level content in terms of objects and theirarrangement in the input image but do not constrain the exact pixel values of the reconstruction very much (Fig 1, content reconstructions d, e). In contrast, reconstructions fromthe lower layers simply reproduce the exact pixel values ofthe original image (Fig 1, content reconstructions a–c). We
therefore refer to the feature responses in higher layers of
the network as the content representation.

2.2. Style representation
To obtain a representation of the style of an input image,
we use a feature space designed to capture texture information [10]. This feature space can be built on top of the filter
responses in any layer of the network. It consists of the correlations between the different filter responses, where theexpectation is taken over the spatial extent of the featuremaps. These feature correlations are given by the Gram matrix Gl ∈ RNl ×Nl , where Glij is the inner product between
the vectorised feature maps i and j in layer l:Xll
Glij =
Fik
Fjk
.
(3)
k

By including the feature correlations of multiple layers, we
obtain a stationary, multi-scale representation of the input
image, which captures its texture information but not the
global arrangement. Again, we can visualise the information captured by these style feature spaces built on different
2416

1

512
...

4

4

conv5_ 3 2

conv5_ 3 2

pool4

pool4

1

1

1

512
...
4

4

conv4_ 3 2

conv4_ 3 2

1

1

pool3

pool3
1

256
...
4

4

conv3_ 3 2

conv3_ 3 2

1

1

pool2

pool2
1

128
...

conv2_ 1 2

conv2_ 1 2

pool1

pool1
1

64
...

# featuremaps

conv1_ 12

conv1_ 12
Gradient
descent

input

input

Figure 2. Style transfer algorithm. First content and style features are extracted and stored. The style image ~a is passed through the network
and its style representation Al on all layers included are computed and stored (left). The content image p~ is passed through the networkand the content representation P l in one layer is stored (right). Then a random white noise image ~x is passed through the network and its
style features Gl and content features F l are computed. On each layer included in the style representation, the element-wise mean squared
difference between Gl and Al is computed to give the style loss Lstyle (left). Also the mean squared difference between F l and P l iscomputed to give the content loss Lcontent (right). The total loss Ltotal is then a linear combination between the content and the style loss.
Its derivative with respect to the pixel values can be computed using error back-propagation (middle). This gradient is used to iteratively
update the image ~x until it simultaneously matches the style features of the style image ~a and the content features of the content image p~(middle, bottom).

layers of the network by constructing an image that matches
the style representation of a given input image (Fig 1, stylereconstructions). This is done by using gradient descentfrom a white noise image to minimise the mean-squared
distance between the entries of the Gram matrices from theoriginal image and the Gram matrices of the image to begenerated [10, 25].
Let ~a and ~x be the original image and the image that is
generated, and Al and Gl their respective style representation in layer l. The contribution of layer l to the total loss is
then
X
2
1
Glij − Alij
(4)
El =
2
2
4Nl Ml i,jand the total style loss is

Lstyle (~a, ~x) =LX

w l El ,(5)

l=0where wl are weighting factors of the contribution of eachlayer to the total loss (see below for specific values of wl in

our results). The derivative of El with respect to the activations in layer l can be computed analytically:(1(F l )T Gl − Al ji if Fijl > 0∂El
Nl2 Ml2
(6)
=
∂Fijl
0
if Fijl < 0 .
The gradients of El with respect to the pixel values ~x canbe readily computed using standard error back-propagation(Fig 2, left).

2.3. Style transfer
To transfer the style of an artwork ~a onto a photograph p~
we synthesise a new image that simultaneously matches thecontent representation of p~ and the style representation of ~a(Fig 2). Thus we jointly minimise the distance of the feature representations of a white noise image from the content
representation of the photograph in one layer and the style
representation of the painting defined on a number of layersof the Convolutional Neural Network. The loss function we
minimise is
2417

A

B

C

D

E

F

Figure 3. Images that combine the content of a photograph with the style of several well-known artworks. The images were created byfinding an image that simultaneously matches the content representation of the photograph and the style representation of the artwork.
The original photograph depicting the Neckarfront in Tübingen, Germany, is shown in A (Photo: Andreas Praefcke). The painting thatprovided the style for the respective generated image is shown in the bottom left corner of each panel. B The Shipwreck of the Minotaur
by J.M.W. Turner, 1805. C The Starry Night by Vincent van Gogh, 1889. D Der Schrei by Edvard Munch, 1893. E Femme nue assise by
Pablo Picasso, 1910. F Composition VII by Wassily Kandinsky, 1913.

2418

Ltotal (~p, ~a, ~x) = αLcontent (~p, ~x) + βLstyle (~a, ~x)

10-4

10-3

10-2

10-1

(7)

where α and β are the weighting factors for content andstyle reconstruction, respectively. The gradient with respect
total
to the pixel values ∂L∂~
can be used as input for some nux
merical optimisation strategy. Here we use L-BFGS [32],which we found to work best for image synthesis. To extract image information on comparable scales, we always
resized the style image to the same size as the content image before computing its feature representations. Finally,note that in difference to [24] we do not regularise our synthesis results with image priors. It could be argued, though,that the texture features from lower layers in the network
act as a specific image prior for the style image. Additionally some differences in the image synthesis are expected
due to the different network architecture and optimisation
algorithm we use.

3. Results
The key finding of this paper is that the representations ofcontent and style in the Convolutional Neural Network arewell separable. That is, we can manipulate both representations independently to produce new, perceptually meaningful images. To demonstrate this finding, we generate images that mix the content and style representation from two
different source images. In particular, we match the content representation of a photograph depicting the riverfrontof the Neckar river in Tübingen, Germany and the style
representations of several well-known artworks taken fromdifferent periods of art (Fig 3). The images shown in Fig
3 were synthesised by matching the content representationon layer ‘conv4 2’ and the style representation on layers‘conv1 1’, ‘conv2 1’, ‘conv3 1’, ‘conv4 1’ and ‘conv5 1’(wl = 1/5 in those layers, wl = 0 in all other layers) . The
ratio α/β was either 1 × 10−3 (Fig 3 B), 8 × 10−4 (Fig 3
C), 5 × 10−3 (Fig 3 D), or 5 × 10−4 (Fig 3 E, F).

3.1. Trade-off between content and style matching
Of course, image content and style cannot be completely
disentangled. When synthesising an image that combines
the content of one image with the style of another, there
usually does not exist an image that perfectly matches bothconstraints at the same time. However, since the loss function we minimise during image synthesis is a linear combination between the loss functions for content and stylerespectively, we can smoothly regulate the emphasis on either reconstructing the content or the style (Fig 4). A strongemphasis on style will result in images that match the appearance of the artwork, effectively giving a texturised version of it, but show hardly any of the photograph’s content(α/β = 1 × 10−4 , Fig 4, top left). When placing strong

Figure 4. Relative weighting of matching content and style of therespective source images. The ratio α/β between matching thecontent and matching the style increases from top left to bottom
right. A high emphasis on the style effectively produces a texturised version of the style image (top left). A high emphasis on
the content produces an image with only little stylisation (bottom
right). In practice one can smoothly interpolate between the two
extremes.

emphasis on content, one can clearly identify the photograph, but the style of the painting is not as well-matched(α/β = 1 × 10−1 , Fig 4, bottom right). For a specific pairof content and style images one can adjust the trade-off between content and style to create visually appealing images.

3.2. Effect of different layers of the Convolutional
Neural Network
Another important factor in the image synthesis process
is the choice of layers to match the content and style representation on. As outlined above, the style representation isa multi-scale representation that includes multiple layers of
the neural network. The number and position of these layers determines the local scale on which the style is matched,leading to different visual experiences (Fig 1, style reconstructions). We find that matching the style representations
up to higher layers in the network preserves local images
structures an increasingly large scale, leading to a smootherand more continuous visual experience. Thus, the visuallymost appealing images are usually created by matching thestyle representation up to high layers in the network, which
is why for all images shown we match the style featuresin layers ‘conv1 1’, ‘conv2 1’, ‘conv3 1’, ‘conv4 1’ and‘conv5 1’ of the network.
To analyse the effect of using different layers to matchthe content features, we present a style transfer result obtained by stylising a photograph with the same artwork andparameter configuration (α/β = 1 × 10−3 ), but in one
2419

Content Image

A

B

C
Conv2_2

Conv4_2

Figure 6. Initialisation of the gradient descent. A Initialised fromthe content image. B Initialised from the style image. C Four
samples of images initialised from different white noise images.
For all images the ratio α/β was equal to 1 × 10−3
Figure 5. The effect of matching the content representation indifferent layers of the network. Matching the content on layer‘conv2 2’ preserves much of the fine structure of the original photograph and the synthesised image looks as if the texture of thepainting is simply blended over the photograph (middle). Whenmatching the content on layer ‘conv4 2’ the texture of the painting and the content of the photograph merge together such that thecontent of the photograph is displayed in the style of the painting(bottom). Both images were generated with the same choice of parameters (α/β = 1 × 10−3 ). The painting that served as the style
image is shown in the bottom left corner and is named Jesuiten III
by Lyonel Feininger, 1915.

matching the content features on layer ‘conv2 2’ and in theother on layer ‘conv4 2’ (Fig 5). When matching the content on a lower layer of the network, the algorithm matchesmuch of the detailed pixel information in the photographand the generated image appears as if the texture of the artwork is merely blended over the photograph (Fig 5, middle). In contrast, when matching the content features on ahigher layer of the network, detailed pixel information of
the photograph is not as strongly constraint and the textureof the artwork and the content of the photograph are properly merged. That is, the fine structure of the image, forexample the edges and colour map, is altered such that it
agrees with the style of the artwork while displaying thecontent of the photograph (Fig 5, bottom).

3.3. Initialisation of gradient descent
We have initialised all images shown so far with white
noise. However, one could also initialise the image synthesis with either the content image or the style image. We
explored these two alternatives (Fig 6 A, B): although theybias the final image somewhat towards the spatial structureof the initialisation, the different initialisations do not seemto have a strong effect on the outcome of the synthesis procedure. It should be noted that only initialising with noise
allows to generate an arbitrary number of new images (Fig 6
C). Initialising with a fixed image always deterministicallyleads to the same outcome (up to stochasticity in the gradient descent procedure).

3.4. Photorealistic style transfer
Thus far the focus of this paper was on artistic style transfer. In general though, the algorithm can transfer the style
between arbitrary images. As an example we transfer thestyle of a photograph of New York by night onto an imageof London in daytime (Fig 7). Although photorealism is
not fully preserved, the synthesised image resembles muchof the colours and lightning of the style image and to someextent displays an image of London by night.
2420

Style Image

4. Discussion
Here we demonstrate how to use feature representations
from high-performing Convolutional Neural Networks totransfer image style between arbitrary images. While weare able to show results of high perceptual quality, there arestill some technical limitations to the algorithm.
Probably the most limiting factor is the resolution of thesynthesised images. Both, the dimensionality of the optimisation problem as well as the number of units in the
Convolutional Neural Network grow linearly with the number of pixels. Therefore the speed of the synthesis procedure depends heavily on image resolution. The images
presented in this paper were synthesised in a resolution of
about 512 × 512 pixels and the synthesis procedure could
take up to an hour on a Nvidia K40 GPU (depending on theexact image size and the stopping criteria for the gradientdescent). While this performance currently prohibits online
and interactive applications of our style transfer algorithm,
it is likely that future improvements in deep learning will
also increase the performance of this method.
Another issue is that synthesised images are sometimes
subject to some low-level noise. While this is less of an issue in the artistic style transfer, the problem becomes more
apparent when both, content and style images, are photographs and the photorealism of the synthesised image isaffected. However, the noise is very characteristic and appears to resemble the filters of units in the network. Thus
it could be possible to construct efficient de-noising techniques to post-process the images after the optimisation procedure.
Artistic stylisation of images is traditionally studied incomputer graphics under the label of non-photorealistic rendering. Apart from the work on texture transfer, common
approaches are conceptually quite different to our work inthat they give specialised algorithms to render a source image in one specific style. For a recent review of the field werefer the reader to [21].
The separation of image content from style is not necessarily a well defined problem. This is mostly because it
is not clear what exactly defines the style of an image. It
might be the brush strokes in a painting, the colour map,
certain dominant forms and shapes, but also the composition of a scene and the choice of the subject of the image –and probably it is a mixture of all of them and many more.
Therefore, it is generally not clear if image content and style
can be completely separated at all – and if so, how. For example it is not possible to render an image in the style ofvan Gogh’s “Starry Night” without having image structuresthat resemble the stars. In our work we consider style transfer to be successful if the generated image ‘looks like’ thestyle image but shows the objects and scenery of the content image. We are fully aware though that this evaluation
criterion is neither mathematically precise nor universally

Content Image

Figure 7. Photorealistic style transfer. The style is transferred froma photograph showing New York by night onto a picture showing
London by day. The image synthesis was initialised from the content image and the ratio α/β was equal to 1 × 10−2

agreed upon.
Nevertheless, we find it truly fascinating that a neuralsystem, which is trained to perform one of the core computational tasks of biological vision, automatically learns
image representations that allow – at least to some extent– the separation of image content from style. One explanation may be that when learning object recognition, thenetwork has to become invariant to all image variation that
preserves object identity. Representations that factorise thevariation in the content of an image and the variation in
its appearance would be extremely practical for this task.
In light of the striking similarities between performanceoptimised artificial neural networks and biological vision[11, 31, 3, 19, 16], it is thus tempting to speculate that thehuman ability to abstract content from style – and therefore
our ability to create and enjoy art – might also be primarily apreeminent signature of the powerful inference capabilitiesof our visual system.

References[1] N. Ashikhmin. Fast texture transfer. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 23(4):38–43, July 2003. 1[2] M. Berning, K. M. Boergens, and M. Helmstaedter. SegEM:
Efficient Image Analysis for High-Resolution Connectomics. Neuron, 87(6):1193–1206, Sept. 2015. 2[3] C. F. Cadieu, H. Hong, D. L. K. Yamins, N. Pinto, D. Ardila,E. A. Solomon, N. J. Majaj, and J. J. DiCarlo. Deep Neural Networks Rival the Representation of Primate IT Cor-2421

tex for Core Visual Object Recognition. PLoS Comput Biol,
10(12):e1003963, Dec. 2014. 8[4] L.-C. Chen, G. Papandreou, I. Kokkinos, K. Murphy,
and A. L. Yuille. Semantic Image Segmentation with
Deep Convolutional Nets and Fully Connected CRFs.
arXiv:1412.7062 [cs], Dec. 2014. arXiv: 1412.7062. 2[5] M. Cimpoi, S. Maji, and A. Vedaldi. Deep filter banks for
texture recognition and segmentation. In Proceedings of theIEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 3828–3836, 2015. 2[6] J. Donahue, Y. Jia, O. Vinyals, J. Hoffman, N. Zhang,
E. Tzeng, and T. Darrell. DeCAF: A Deep Convolutional Activation Feature for Generic Visual Recognition.
arXiv:1310.1531 [cs], Oct. 2013. arXiv: 1310.1531. 2[7] A. Efros and T. K. Leung. Texture synthesis by nonparametric sampling. In Computer Vision, 1999. The Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on,volume 2, pages 1033–1038. IEEE, 1999. 1[8] A. A. Efros and W. T. Freeman. Image quilting for texture synthesis and transfer. In Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, pages 341–346. ACM, 2001. 1[9] D. Eigen and R. Fergus. Predicting Depth, Surface Normals
and Semantic Labels With a Common Multi-Scale Convolutional Architecture. pages 2650–2658, 2015. 2[10] L. A. Gatys, A. S. Ecker, and M. Bethge. Texture Synthesis Using Convolutional Neural Networks. In Advances in
Neural Information Processing Systems 28, 2015. 3, 4
[11] U. Güçlü and M. A. J. v. Gerven. Deep Neural Networks
Reveal a Gradient in the Complexity of Neural Representations across the Ventral Stream. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(27):10005–10014, July 2015. 8[12] D. J. Heeger and J. R. Bergen. Pyramid-based Texture Analysis/Synthesis. In Proceedings of the 22Nd Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques,
SIGGRAPH ’95, pages 229–238, New York, NY, USA,1995. ACM. 3[13] A. Hertzmann, C. E. Jacobs, N. Oliver, B. Curless, and D. H.
Salesin. Image analogies. In Proceedings of the 28th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, pages 327–340. ACM, 2001. 1[14] Y. Jia, E. Shelhamer, J. Donahue, S. Karayev, J. Long, R. Girshick, S. Guadarrama, and T. Darrell. Caffe: Convolutionalarchitecture for fast feature embedding. In Proceedings of
the ACM International Conference on Multimedia, pages
675–678. ACM, 2014. 3[15] S. Karayev, M. Trentacoste, H. Han, A. Agarwala, T. Darrell,
A. Hertzmann, and H. Winnemoeller. Recognizing imagestyle. arXiv preprint arXiv:1311.3715, 2013. 2[16] S.-M. Khaligh-Razavi and N. Kriegeskorte. Deep Supervised, but Not Unsupervised, Models May Explain IT Cortical Representation. PLoS Comput Biol, 10(11):e1003915,
Nov. 2014. 8[17] D. P. Kingma, S. Mohamed, D. Jimenez Rezende, and
M. Welling. Semi-supervised Learning with Deep Generative Models. In Z. Ghahramani, M. Welling, C. Cortes, N. D.

Lawrence, and K. Q. Weinberger, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27, pages 3581–3589.
Curran Associates, Inc., 2014. 2[18] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton. Imagenet
classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In
Advances in neural information processing systems, pages
1097–1105, 2012. 2[19] M. Kümmerer, L. Theis, and M. Bethge. Deep Gaze I: Boosting Saliency Prediction with Feature Maps Trained on ImageNet. In ICLR Workshop, 2015. 2, 8
[20] V. Kwatra, A. Schödl, I. Essa, G. Turk, and A. Bobick.
Graphcut textures: image and video synthesis using graphcuts. In ACM Transactions on Graphics (ToG), volume 22,
pages 277–286. ACM, 2003. 1[21] J. E. Kyprianidis, J. Collomosse, T. Wang, and T. Isenberg.
State of the ”Art”: A Taxonomy of Artistic Stylization Techniques for Images and Video. Visualization and Computer
Graphics, IEEE Transactions on, 19(5):866–885, 2013. 8[22] H. Lee, S. Seo, S. Ryoo, and K. Yoon. Directional Texture
Transfer. In Proceedings of the 8th International Symposiumon Non-Photorealistic Animation and Rendering, NPAR ’10,
pages 43–48, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM. 1[23] J. Long, E. Shelhamer, and T. Darrell. Fully Convolutional
Networks for Semantic Segmentation. pages 3431–3440,
2015. 2[24] A. Mahendran and A. Vedaldi. Understanding Deep Image
Representations by Inverting Them. arXiv:1412.0035 [cs],Nov. 2014. arXiv: 1412.0035. 3, 6
[25] J. Portilla and E. P. Simoncelli. A Parametric Texture Model
Based on Joint Statistics of Complex Wavelet Coefficients.
International Journal of Computer Vision, 40(1):49–70, Oct.
2000. 3, 4[26] O. Russakovsky, J. Deng, H. Su, J. Krause, S. Satheesh,
S. Ma, Z. Huang, A. Karpathy, A. Khosla, M. Bernstein,
A. C. Berg, and L. Fei-Fei. ImageNet Large Scale Visual
Recognition Challenge. arXiv:1409.0575 [cs], Sept. 2014.
arXiv: 1409.0575. 3[27] K. Simonyan, A. Vedaldi, and A. Zisserman. Deep Inside
Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification
Models and Saliency Maps. arXiv:1312.6034 [cs], Dec.
2013. 3[28] K. Simonyan and A. Zisserman.
Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognition.
arXiv:1409.1556 [cs], Sept. 2014. arXiv: 1409.1556. 3[29] J. B. Tenenbaum and W. T. Freeman. Separating styleand content with bilinear models. Neural computation,
12(6):1247–1283, 2000. 2[30] L. Wei and M. Levoy. Fast texture synthesis using treestructured vector quantization. In Proceedings of the 27th
annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive
techniques, pages 479–488. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley
Publishing Co., 2000. 1[31] D. L. K. Yamins, H. Hong, C. F. Cadieu, E. A. Solomon,
D. Seibert, and J. J. DiCarlo. Performance-optimized hierarchical models predict neural responses in higher visual cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, page201403112, May 2014. 8

2422

[32] C. Zhu, R. H. Byrd, P. Lu, and J. Nocedal. Algorithm
778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale boundconstrained optimization. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS), 23(4):550–560, 1997. 6

2423