DOCSLIB.ORG

Object Detection and Recognition in Digital Images THEORY and PRACTICE Bogusław Cyganek

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Object Detection and Recognition in Digital Images THEORY and PRACTICE Bogusław Cyganek Object Detection and Recognition in Digital Images THEORY AND PRACTICE Bogusław Cyganek OBJECT DETECTION AND RECOGNITION IN DIGITAL IMAGES OBJECT DETECTION AND RECOGNITION IN DIGITAL IMAGES THEORY AND PRACTICE Bogusław Cyganek AGH University of Science and Technology, Poland A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication This edition first published 2013 C 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd Registered office John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, United Kingdom For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com. The right of the author to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. MATLABR is a trademark of The MathWorks, Inc. and is used with permission. The MathWorks does not warrant the accuracy of the text or exercises in this book. This books use or discussion of MATLABR software or related products does not constitute endorsement or sponsorship by The MathWorks of a particular pedagogical approach or particular use of the MATLABR software. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Cyganek, Boguslaw. Object detection and recognition in digital images : theory and practice / Boguslaw Cyganek. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-470-97637-1 (cloth) 1. Pattern recognition systems. 2. Image processing–Digital techniques. 3. Computer vision. I. Title. TK7882.P3C94 2013 621.3994–dc23 2012050754 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN: 978-0-470-97637-1 Typeset in 10/12pt Times by Aptara Inc., New Delhi, India To my family with love Contents Preface xiii Acknowledgements xv Notations and Abbreviations xvii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 A Sample of Computer Vision 3 1.2 Overview of Book Contents 6 References 8 2 Tensor Methods in Computer Vision 9 2.1 Abstract 9 2.2 Tensor – A Mathematical Object 10 2.2.1 Main Properties of Linear Spaces 10 2.2.2 Concept of a Tensor 11 2.3 Tensor – A Data Object 13 2.4 Basic Properties of Tensors 15 2.4.1 Notation of Tensor Indices and Components 16 2.4.2 Tensor Products 18 2.5 Tensor Distance Measures 20 2.5.1 Overview of Tensor Distances 22 2.5.1.1 Computation of Matrix Exponent and Logarithm Functions 24 2.5.2 Euclidean Image Distance and Standardizing Transform 29 2.6 Filtering of Tensor Fields 33 2.6.1 Order Statistic Filtering of Tensor Data 33 2.6.2 Anisotropic Diffusion Filtering 36 2.6.3 IMPLEMENTATION of Diffusion Processes 40 2.7 Looking into Images with the Structural Tensor 44 2.7.1 Structural Tensor in Two-Dimensional Image Space 47 2.7.2 Spatio-Temporal Structural Tensor 50 2.7.3 Multichannel and Scale-Space Structural Tensor 52 2.7.4 Extended Structural Tensor 54 2.7.4.1 IMPLEMENTATION of the Linear and Nonlinear Structural Tensor 57 viii Contents 2.8 Object Representation with Tensor of Inertia and Moments 62 2.8.1 IMPLEMENTATION of Moments and their Invariants 65 2.9 Eigendecomposition and Representation of Tensors 68 2.10 Tensor Invariants 72 2.11 Geometry of Multiple Views: The Multifocal Tensor 72 2.12 Multilinear Tensor Methods 75 2.12.1 Basic Concepts of Multilinear Algebra 78 2.12.1.1 Tensor Flattening 78 2.12.1.2 IMPLEMENTATION Tensor Representation 84 2.12.1.3 The k-mode Product of a Tensor and a Matrix 95 2.12.1.4 Ranks of a Tensor 100 2.12.1.5 IMPLEMENTATION of Basic Operations on Tensors 101 2.12.2 Higher-Order Singular Value Decomposition (HOSVD) 112 2.12.3 Computation of the HOSVD 114 2.12.3.1 Implementation of the HOSVD Decomposition 119 2.12.4 HOSVD Induced Bases 121 2.12.5 Tensor Best Rank-1 Approximation 123 2.12.6 Rank-1 Decomposition of Tensors 126 2.12.7 Best Rank-(R1,R2, ... ,RP) Approximation 131 2.12.8 Computation of the Best Rank-(R1,R2, ... ,RP) Approximations 134 2.12.8.1 IMPLEMENTATION – Rank Tensor Decompositions 137 2.12.8.2 CASE STUDY – Data Dimensionality Reduction 145 2.12.9 Subspace Data Representation 149 2.12.10 Nonnegative Matrix Factorization 151 2.12.11 Computation of the Nonnegative Matrix Factorization 155 2.12.12 Image Representation with NMF 160 2.12.13 Implementation of the Nonnegative Matrix Factorization 162 2.12.14 Nonnegative Tensor Factorization 169 2.12.15 Multilinear Methods of Object Recognition 173 2.13 Closure 179 2.13.1 Chapter Summary 179 2.13.2 Further Reading 180 2.13.3 Problems and Exercises 181 References 182 3 Classification Methods and Algorithms 189 3.1 Abstract 189 3.2 Classification Framework 190 3.2.1 IMPLEMENTATION Computer Representation of Features 191 3.3 Subspace Methods for Object Recognition 194 3.3.1 Principal Component Analysis 195 3.3.1.1 Computation of the PCA 199 3.3.1.2 PCA for Multi-Channel Image Processing 210 3.3.1.3 PCA for Background Subtraction 214 3.3.2 Subspace Pattern Classification 215 Contents ix 3.4 Statistical Formulation of the Object Recognition 222 3.4.1 Parametric and Nonparametric Methods 222 3.4.2 Probabilistic Framework 222 3.4.3 Bayes Decision Rule 223 3.4.4 Maximum a posteriori Classification Scheme 224 3.4.5 Binary Classification Problem 226 3.5 Parametric Methods – Mixture of Gaussians 227 3.6 The Kalman Filter 233 3.7 Nonparametric Methods 236 3.7.1 Histogram Based Techniques 236 3.7.2 Comparing Histograms 239 3.7.3 IMPLEMENTATION – Multidimensional Histograms 243 3.7.4 Parzen Method 246 3.7.4.1 Kernel Based Methods 248 3.7.4.2 Nearest-Neighbor Method 250 3.8 The Mean Shift Method 251 3.8.1 Introduction to the Mean Shift 251 3.8.2 Continuously Adaptive Mean Shift Method (CamShift) 257 3.8.3 Algorithmic Aspects of the Mean Shift Tracking 259 3.8.3.1 Tracking of Multiple Features 259 3.8.3.2 Tracking of Multiple Objects 260 3.8.3.3 Fuzzy Approach to the CamShift 261 3.8.3.4 Discrimination with Background Information 262 3.8.3.5 Adaptive Update of the Classifiers 263 3.8.4 IMPLEMENTATION of the CamShift Method 264 3.9 Neural Networks 267 3.9.1 Probabilistic Neural Network 267 3.9.2 IMPLEMENTATION – Probabilistic Neural Network 270 3.9.3 Hamming Neural Network 274 3.9.4 IMPLEMENTATION of the Hamming Neural Network 278 3.9.5 Morphological Neural Network 282 3.9.5.1 IMPLEMENTATION of the Morphological Neural Network 285 3.10 Kernels in Vision Pattern Recognition 291 3.10.1 Kernel Functions 296 3.10.2 IMPLEMENTATION – Kernels 301 3.11 Data Clustering 306 3.11.1 The k-Means Algorithm 308 3.11.2 Fuzzy c-Means 311 3.11.3 Kernel Fuzzy c-Means 313 3.11.4 Measures of Cluster Quality 315 3.11.5 IMPLEMENTATION Issues 317 3.12 Support Vector Domain Description 327 3.12.1 Implementation of Support Vector Machines 333 3.12.2 Architecture of the Ensemble of One-Class Classifiers 334 3.13 Appendix – MATLABR and other Packages for Pattern Classification 336 3.14 Closure 336 x Contents 3.14.1 Chapter Summary 336 3.14.2 Further Reading 337 Problems and Exercises 338 References 339 4 Object Detection and Tracking 346 4.1 Introduction 346 4.2 Direct Pixel Classification 346 4.2.1 Ground-Truth Data Collection 347 4.2.2 CASE STUDY – Human Skin Detection 348 4.2.3 CASE STUDY – Pixel Based Road Signs Detection 352 4.2.3.1 Fuzzy Approach 353 4.2.3.2 SVM Based Approach 353 4.2.4 Pixel Based Image Segmentation with Ensemble of Classifiers 361 4.3 Detection of Basic Shapes 364 4.3.1 Detection of Line Segments 366 4.3.2 UpWrite Detection of Convex Shapes 367 4.4 Figure Detection 370 4.4.1 Detection of Regular Shapes from Characteristic Points 371 4.4.2 Clustering of the Salient Points 375 4.4.3 Adaptive Window Growing Method 376 4.4.4 Figure Verification 378 4.4.5 CASE STUDY – Road Signs Detection System 380 4.5 CASE STUDY – Road Signs Tracking and Recognition 385 4.6 CASE STUDY – Framework for Object Tracking 389 4.7 Pedestrian Detection 395 4.8 Closure 402 4.8.1 Chapter Summary 402 4.8.2 Further Reading 402 Problems and Exercises 403 References 403 5 Object Recognition 408 5.1 Abstract 408 5.2 Recognition from Tensor Phase Histograms and Morphological Scale Space 409 5.2.1 Computation of the Tensor Phase Histograms in Morphological Scale 411 5.2.2 Matching of the Tensor Phase Histograms 413 5.2.3 CASE STUDY – Object Recognition with Tensor Phase Histograms in Morphological Scale Space 415 5.3 Invariant Based Recognition 420 5.3.1 CASE STUDY – Pictogram Recognition with Affine Moment Invariants 421 5.4 Template Based Recognition 424 5.4.1 Template Matching for Road Signs Recognition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hough Transform, Descriptors Tammy Riklin Raviv Electrical and Computer Engineering Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Hough Transform
    DIGITAL IMAGE PROCESSING Lecture 7 Hough transform, descriptors Tammy Riklin Raviv Electrical and Computer Engineering Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Hough transform y m x b y m 3 5 3 3 2 2 3 7 11 10 4 3 2 3 1 4 5 2 2 1 0 1 3 3 x b Slide from S. Savarese Hough transform Issues: • Parameter space [m,b] is unbounded. • Vertical lines have infinite gradient. Use a polar representation for the parameter space Hough space r y r q x q x cosq + ysinq = r Slide from S. Savarese Hough Transform Each point votes for a complete family of potential lines: Each pencil of lines sweeps out a sinusoid in Their intersection provides the desired line equation. Hough transform - experiments r q Image features ρ,ϴ model parameter histogram Slide from S. Savarese Hough transform - experiments Noisy data Image features ρ,ϴ model parameter histogram Need to adjust grid size or smooth Slide from S. Savarese Hough transform - experiments Image features ρ,ϴ model parameter histogram Issue: spurious peaks due to uniform noise Slide from S. Savarese Hough Transform Algorithm 1. Image à Canny 2. Canny à Hough votes 3. Hough votes à Edges Find peaks and post-process Hough transform example http://ostatic.com/files/images/ss_hough.jpg Incorporating image gradients • Recall: when we detect an edge point, we also know its gradient direction • But this means that the line is uniquely determined! • Modified Hough transform: for each edge point (x,y) θ = gradient orientation at (x,y) ρ = x cos θ + y sin θ H(θ, ρ) = H(θ, ρ) + 1 end Finding lines using Hough transform
    [Show full text]
  • A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION of LOCAL DESCRIPTORS 1 a Performance Evaluation of Local Descriptors
    MIKOLAJCZYK AND SCHMID: A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF LOCAL DESCRIPTORS 1 A performance evaluation of local descriptors Krystian Mikolajczyk and Cordelia Schmid Dept. of Engineering Science INRIA Rhone-Alpesˆ University of Oxford 655, av. de l'Europe Oxford, OX1 3PJ 38330 Montbonnot United Kingdom France [email protected] [email protected] Abstract In this paper we compare the performance of descriptors computed for local interest regions, as for example extracted by the Harris-Affine detector [32]. Many different descriptors have been proposed in the literature. However, it is unclear which descriptors are more appropriate and how their performance depends on the interest region detector. The descriptors should be distinctive and at the same time robust to changes in viewing conditions as well as to errors of the detector. Our evaluation uses as criterion recall with respect to precision and is carried out for different image transformations. We compare shape context [3], steerable filters [12], PCA-SIFT [19], differential invariants [20], spin images [21], SIFT [26], complex filters [37], moment invariants [43], and cross-correlation for different types of interest regions. We also propose an extension of the SIFT descriptor, and show that it outperforms the original method. Furthermore, we observe that the ranking of the descriptors is mostly independent of the interest region detector and that the SIFT based descriptors perform best. Moments and steerable filters show the best performance among the low dimensional descriptors. Index Terms Local descriptors, interest points, interest regions, invariance, matching, recognition. I. INTRODUCTION Local photometric descriptors computed for interest regions have proved to be very successful in applications such as wide baseline matching [37, 42], object recognition [10, 25], texture Corresponding author is K.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Introduction
    1: Introduction Ahmad Humayun 1 Introduction z A pixel is not a square (or rectangular). It is simply a point sample. There are cases where the contributions to a pixel can be modeled, in a low order way, by a little square, but not ever the pixel itself. The sampling theorem tells us that we can reconstruct a continuous entity from such a discrete entity using an appropriate reconstruction filter - for example a truncated Gaussian. z Cameras approximated by pinhole cameras. When pinhole too big - many directions averaged to blur the image. When pinhole too small - diffraction effects blur the image. z A lens system is there in a camera to correct for the many optical aberrations - they are basically aberrations when light from one point of an object does not converge into a single point after passing through the lens system. Optical aberrations fall into 2 categories: monochromatic (caused by the geometry of the lens and occur both when light is reflected and when it is refracted - like pincushion etc.); and chromatic (Chromatic aberrations are caused by dispersion, the variation of a lens's refractive index with wavelength). Lenses are essentially help remove the shortfalls of a pinhole camera i.e. how to admit more light and increase the resolution of the imaging system at the same time. With a simple lens, much more light can be bought into sharp focus. Different problems with lens systems: 1. Spherical aberration - A perfect lens focuses all incoming rays to a point on the optic axis. A real lens with spherical surfaces suffers from spherical aberration: it focuses rays more tightly if they enter it far from the optic axis than if they enter closer to the axis.
    [Show full text]
  • Detection and Evaluation Methods for Local Image and Video Features Julian Stottinger¨
    Technical Report CVL-TR-4 Detection and Evaluation Methods for Local Image and Video Features Julian Stottinger¨ Computer Vision Lab Institute of Computer Aided Automation Vienna University of Technology 2. Marz¨ 2011 Abstract In computer vision, local image descriptors computed in areas around salient interest points are the state-of-the-art in visual matching. This technical report aims at finding more stable and more informative interest points in the domain of images and videos. The research interest is the development of relevant evaluation methods for visual mat- ching approaches. The contribution of this work lies on one hand in the introduction of new features to the computer vision community. On the other hand, there is a strong demand for valid evaluation methods and approaches gaining new insights for general recognition tasks. This work presents research in the detection of local features both in the spatial (“2D” or image) domain as well for spatio-temporal (“3D” or video) features. For state-of-the-art classification the extraction of discriminative interest points has an impact on the final classification performance. It is crucial to find which interest points are of use in a specific task. One question is for example whether it is possible to reduce the number of interest points extracted while still obtaining state-of-the-art image retrieval or object recognition results. This would gain a significant reduction in processing time and would possibly allow for new applications e.g. in the domain of mobile computing. Therefore, the work investigates different corner detection approaches and evaluates their repeatability under varying alterations.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Descriptors
    Local descriptors SIFT (Scale Invariant Feature Transform) descriptor • SIFT keypoints at locaon xy and scale σ have been obtained according to a procedure that guarantees illuminaon and scale invance. By assigning a consistent orientaon, the SIFT keypoint descriptor can be also orientaon invariant. • SIFT descriptor is therefore obtained from the following steps: – Determine locaon and scale by maximizing DoG in scale and in space (i.e. find the blurred image of closest scale) – Sample the points around the keypoint and use the keypoint local orientaon as the dominant gradient direc;on. Use this scale and orientaon to make all further computaons invariant to scale and rotaon (i.e. rotate the gradients and coordinates by the dominant orientaon) – Separate the region around the keypoint into subregions and compute a 8-bin gradient orientaon histogram of each subregion weigthing samples with a σ = 1.5 Gaussian SIFT aggregaon window • In order to derive a descriptor for the keypoint region we could sample intensi;es around the keypoint, but they are sensi;ve to ligh;ng changes and to slight errors in x, y, θ. In order to make keypoint es;mate more reliable, it is usually preferable to use a larger aggregaon window (i.e. the Gaussian kernel size) than the detec;on window. The SIFT descriptor is hence obtained from thresholded image gradients sampled over a 16x16 array of locaons in the neighbourhood of the detected keypoint, using the level of the Gaussian pyramid at which the keypoint was detected. For each 4x4 region samples they are accumulated into a gradient orientaon histogram with 8 sampled orientaons.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Feature Detectors and Descriptors Overview
    CS 6350 – COMPUTER VISION Local Feature Detectors and Descriptors Overview • Local invariant features • Keypoint localization - Hessian detector - Harris corner detector • Scale Invariant region detection - Laplacian of Gaussian (LOG) detector - Difference of Gaussian (DOG) detector • Local feature descriptor - Scale Invariant Feature Transform (SIFT) - Gradient Localization Oriented Histogram (GLOH) • Examples of other local feature descriptors Motivation • Global feature from the whole image is often not desirable • Instead match local regions which are prominent to the object or scene in the image. • Application Area - Object detection - Image matching - Image stitching Requirements of a local feature • Repetitive : Detect the same points independently in each image. • Invariant to translation, rotation, scale. • Invariant to affine transformation. • Invariant to presence of noise, blur etc. • Locality :Robust to occlusion, clutter and illumination change. • Distinctiveness : The region should contain “interesting” structure. • Quantity : There should be enough points to represent the image. • Time efficient. Others preferable (but not a must): o Disturbances, attacks, o Noise o Image blur o Discretization errors o Compression artifacts o Deviations from the mathematical model (non-linearities, non-planarities, etc.) o Intra-class variations General approach + + + 1. Find the interest points. + + 2. Consider the region + ( ) around each keypoint. local descriptor 3. Compute a local descriptor from the region and normalize the feature.
    [Show full text]
  • Interest Point Detectors and Descriptors for IR Images
    DEGREE PROJECT, IN COMPUTER SCIENCE , SECOND LEVEL STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2015 Interest Point Detectors and Descriptors for IR Images AN EVALUATION OF COMMON DETECTORS AND DESCRIPTORS ON IR IMAGES JOHAN JOHANSSON KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND COMMUNICATION (CSC) Interest Point Detectors and Descriptors for IR Images An Evaluation of Common Detectors and Descriptors on IR Images JOHAN JOHANSSON Master’s Thesis at CSC Supervisors: Martin Solli, FLIR Systems Atsuto Maki Examiner: Stefan Carlsson Abstract Interest point detectors and descriptors are the basis of many applications within computer vision. In the selection of which methods to use in an application, it is of great in- terest to know their performance against possible changes to the appearance of the content in an image. Many studies have been completed in the field on visual images while the performance on infrared images is not as charted. This degree project, conducted at FLIR Systems, pro- vides a performance evaluation of detectors and descriptors on infrared images. Three evaluations steps are performed. The first evaluates the performance of detectors; the sec- ond descriptors; and the third combinations of detectors and descriptors. We find that best performance is obtained by Hessian- Affine with LIOP and the binary combination of ORB de- tector and BRISK descriptor to be a good alternative with comparable results but with increased computational effi- ciency by two orders of magnitude. Referat Detektorer och deskriptorer för extrempunkter i IR-bilder Detektorer och deskriptorer är grundpelare till många ap- plikationer inom datorseende. Vid valet av metod till en specifik tillämpning är det av stort intresse att veta hur de presterar mot möjliga förändringar i hur innehållet i en bild framträder.
    [Show full text]
  • Keypoint Extraction and Selection for Object Recognition
    7-1 MVA2009 IAPR Conference on Machine Vision Applications, May 20-22, 2009, Yokohama, JAPAN Keypoint extraction and selection for object recognition Maja Rudinac Boris Lenseigne Pieter Jonker Delft Biorobotics Laboratory, Department of BioMechanical Engineering Delft University of Technology, 2628 CD, Delft, The Netherlands { m.rudinac, b.a.j.lenseigne, p.p.jonker}@tudelft.nl Abstract the method for selecting the most representative points in the scene. In order to gain as much information as possi- In order to improve the performance of affine invariant ble, we decided to combine different keypoint extraction detectors, approaches that combine different keypoint methods for detecting the object and then to reduce the extraction methods can be found in literature. However, number of found keypoints using an independent measure such a combining has two major drawbacks: a high com- for information content. This reduction is performed for putational cost in matching similar objects, and a large two reasons: to keep the most discriminative points, and number of false positives because only a relatively small to speed up the matching. For creating the object models, subset of those keypoints is really discriminative. In this the most representative keypoints are then described us- paper we propose a method to overcome these limitations: ing SIFT [1] and GLOH [6] descriptors. This paper is First we combine different keypoint extractors in order to organized as follows: chapter 2 gives a short overview of obtain a large set of possible interest points for a given related work. The detailed explanation of our approach object. Then, a two step filtering approach is applied: and the test results are presented in chapters 3-5.
    [Show full text]
  • Features • Harris Corner Detector • SIFT Features •Extensions • Applications
    Outline •Features • Harris corner detector • SIFT Features •Extensions • Applications Digital Visual Effects Yung-Yu Chuang with slides by Trevor Darrell Cordelia Schmid, David Lowe, Darya Frolova, Denis Simakov, Robert Collins and Jiwon Kim Features • Also known as interesting points, salient points or keypoints. Points that you can easily point out their correspondences in multiple images using only local information. Features ? Desired properties for features Applications • Distinctive: a single feature can be correctly • Object or scene recognition matched with high probability. • Structure from motion • Invariant: invariant to scale, rotation, affine, •Stereo illumination and noise for robust matching • Motion tracking across a substantial range of affine distortion, viewpoint change and so on. That is, it is •… repeatable. Components • Feature detection locates where they are • Feature description describes what they are • Feature matching decides whether two are the same one Harris corner detector Moravec corner detector (1980) Moravec corner detector • We should easily recognize the point by looking through a small window • Shifting a window in any direction should give a large change in intensity flat Moravec corner detector Moravec corner detector flat flat edge Moravec corner detector Moravec corner detector Change of intensity for the shift [u,v]: E(u,v) w(x, y)I(x u, y v) I(x, y) 2 x, y window shifted intensity function intensity corner flat edge Four shifts: (u,v) = (1,0), (1,1), (0,1), (-1, 1) isolated point Look for local maxima in min{E} Problems of Moravec detector Harris corner detector • Noisy response due to a binary window function Noisy response due to a binary window function • Only a set of shifts at every 45 degree is Use a Gaussian function considered • Only minimum of E is taken into account Harris corner detector (1988) solves these problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Rotation Invariant Histogram Features for Object Detection and Tracking in Aerial Imagery
    ROTATION INVARIANT HISTOGRAM FEATURES FOR OBJECT DETECTION AND TRACKING IN AERIAL IMAGERY Dissertation Submitted to The School of Engineering of the UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Electrical Engineering By Alex Mathew UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON Dayton, Ohio May, 2014 ROTATION INVARIANT HISTOGRAM FEATURES FOR OBJECT DETECTION AND TRACKING IN AERIAL IMAGERY Name: Mathew, Alex APPROVED BY: Vijayan K. Asari, Ph.D. Keigo Hirakawa, Ph.D. Advisor Committee Chairman Committee Member Professor, Department of Electrical and Assistant Professor, Department of Computer Engineering Electrical and Computer Engineering Raul´ Ordo´nez,˜ Ph.D Youssef N. Raffoul, Ph.D Committee Member Committee Member Associate Professor, Department of Professor, Department of Mathematics Electrical and Computer Engineering John G. Weber, Ph.D. Tony E. Saliba, Ph.D. Associate Dean Dean, School of Engineering School of Engineering & Wilke Distinguished Professor ii c Copyright by Alex Mathew All rights reserved 2014 ABSTRACT ROTATION INVARIANT HISTOGRAM FEATURES FOR OBJECT DETECTION AND TRACKING IN AERIAL IMAGERY Name: Mathew, Alex University of Dayton Advisor: Dr. Vijayan K. Asari Object detection and tracking in imagery captured by aerial systems are becoming increasingly important in computer vision research. In aerial imagery, objects can appear in any orientation, vary- ing sizes and in different lighting conditions. Due to the exponential growth in sensor technology, increasing size and resolution of aerial imagery are becoming a challenge for real-time computation. A rotation invariant feature extraction technique for detecting and tracking objects in aerial imagery is presented in this dissertation. Rotation invariance in the feature representation is addressed by considering concentric circular regions centered at visually salient locations of the object.
    [Show full text]
  • SIFTSIFT -- Thethe Scalescale Invariantinvariant Featurefeature Transformtransform
    SIFTSIFT -- TheThe ScaleScale InvariantInvariant FeatureFeature TransformTransform Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. David G. Lowe, International Journal of Computer Vision, 60, 2 (2004), pp. 91-110 Presented by Ofir Pele. Based upon slides from: - Sebastian Thrun and Jana Košecká - Neeraj Kumar Correspondence ■ Fundamental to many of the core vision problems – Recognition – Motion tracking – Multiview geometry ■ Local features are the key Images from: M. Brown and D. G. Lowe. Recognising Panoramas. In Proceedings of the the International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV2003 ( Local Features: Detectors & Descriptors Detected Descriptors Interest Points/Regions <0 12 31 0 0 23 …> <5 0 0 11 37 15 …> <14 21 10 0 3 22 …> Ideal Interest Points/Regions ■ Lots of them ■ Repeatable ■ Representative orientation/scale ■ Fast to extract and match SIFT Overview Detector 1. Find Scale-Space Extrema 2. Keypoint Localization & Filtering – Improve keypoints and throw out bad ones 3. Orientation Assignment – Remove effects of rotation and scale 4. Create descriptor – Using histograms of orientations Descriptor SIFT Overview Detector 1.1. FindFind Scale-SpaceScale-Space ExtremaExtrema 2. Keypoint Localization & Filtering – Improve keypoints and throw out bad ones 3. Orientation Assignment – Remove effects of rotation and scale 4. Create descriptor – Using histograms of orientations Descriptor Scale Space ■ Need to find ‘characteristic scale’ for feature ■ Scale-Space: Continuous function of scale σ – Only reasonable kernel is
    [Show full text]
  • Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF)
    Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF) Herbert Bay a , Andreas Ess a , Tinne Tuytelaars b , and Luc Van Gool a;b aETH Zurich, BIWI Sternwartstrasse 7 CH-8092 Zurich Switzerland bK. U. Leuven, ESAT-PSI Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 B-3001 Leuven Belgium Abstract This article presents a novel scale- and rotation-invariant detector and descriptor, coined SURF (Speeded-Up Robust Features). SURF approximates or even outperforms previously proposed schemes with respect to repeatability, distinctiveness, and robustness, yet can be computed and compared much faster. This is achieved by relying on integral images for image convolutions; by building on the strengths of the leading existing detectors and descriptors (specifically, using a Hessian matrix-based measure for the detector, and a distribution-based descriptor); and by simplifying these methods to the essential. This leads to a combination of novel detection, description, and matching steps. The paper encompasses a detailed description of the detector and descriptor and then explores the effect of the most important parameters. We conclude the article with SURF's application to two challenging, yet converse goals: camera calibration as a special case of image registration, and object recognition. Our experiments underline SURF's usefulness in a broad range of topics in computer vision. Key words: interest points, local features, feature description, camera calibration, object recognition PACS: 1. Introduction between the vectors, e.g. the Mahalanobis or Euclidean dis- tance. The dimension of the descriptor has a direct impact The task of finding point correspondences between two on the time this takes, and less dimensions are desirable for images of the same scene or object is part of many computer fast interest point matching.
    [Show full text]