TY - JOUR
T1 - Interesting interest points
T2 - a comparative study of interest point performance on a unique data set
AU - Aanæs, Henrik
AU - Dahl, Anders Lindbjerg
AU - Pedersen, Kim Steenstrup
PY - 2012/3
Y1 - 2012/3
N2 - Not all interest points are equally interesting. The most valuable interest points lead to optimal performance of the computer vision method in which they are employed. But a measure of this kind will be dependent on the chosen vision application. We propose a more general performance measure based on spatial invariance of interest points under changing acquisition parameters by measuring the spatial recall rate. The scope of this paper is to investigate the performance of a number of existing well-established interest point detection methods. Automatic performance evaluation of interest points is hard because the true correspondence is generally unknown. We overcome this by providing an extensive data set with known spatial correspondence. The data is acquired with a camera mounted on a 6-axis industrial robot providing very accurate camera positioning. Furthermore the scene is scanned with a structured light scanner resulting in precise 3D surface information. In total 60 scenes are depicted ranging from model houses, building material, fruit and vegetables, fabric, printed media and more. Each scene is depicted from 119 camera positions and 19 individual LED illuminations are used for each position. The LED illumination provides the option for artificially relighting the scene from a range of light directions. This data set has given us the ability to systematically evaluate the performance of a number of interest point detectors. The highlights of the conclusions are that the fixed scale Harris corner detector performs overall best followed by the Hessian based detectors and the difference of Gaussian (DoG). The methods based on scale space features have an overall better performance than other methods especially when varying the distance to the scene, where especially FAST corner detector, Edge Based Regions (EBR) and Intensity Based Regions (IBR) have a poor performance. The performance of Maximally Stable Extremal Regions (MSER) is moderate. We observe a relatively large decline in performance with both changes in viewpoint and light direction. Some of our observations support previous findings while others contradict these findings.
AB - Not all interest points are equally interesting. The most valuable interest points lead to optimal performance of the computer vision method in which they are employed. But a measure of this kind will be dependent on the chosen vision application. We propose a more general performance measure based on spatial invariance of interest points under changing acquisition parameters by measuring the spatial recall rate. The scope of this paper is to investigate the performance of a number of existing well-established interest point detection methods. Automatic performance evaluation of interest points is hard because the true correspondence is generally unknown. We overcome this by providing an extensive data set with known spatial correspondence. The data is acquired with a camera mounted on a 6-axis industrial robot providing very accurate camera positioning. Furthermore the scene is scanned with a structured light scanner resulting in precise 3D surface information. In total 60 scenes are depicted ranging from model houses, building material, fruit and vegetables, fabric, printed media and more. Each scene is depicted from 119 camera positions and 19 individual LED illuminations are used for each position. The LED illumination provides the option for artificially relighting the scene from a range of light directions. This data set has given us the ability to systematically evaluate the performance of a number of interest point detectors. The highlights of the conclusions are that the fixed scale Harris corner detector performs overall best followed by the Hessian based detectors and the difference of Gaussian (DoG). The methods based on scale space features have an overall better performance than other methods especially when varying the distance to the scene, where especially FAST corner detector, Edge Based Regions (EBR) and Intensity Based Regions (IBR) have a poor performance. The performance of Maximally Stable Extremal Regions (MSER) is moderate. We observe a relatively large decline in performance with both changes in viewpoint and light direction. Some of our observations support previous findings while others contradict these findings.
U2 - 10.1007/s11263-011-0473-8
DO - 10.1007/s11263-011-0473-8
M3 - Journal article
SN - 0920-5691
VL - 97
SP - 18
EP - 35
JO - International Journal of Computer Vision
JF - International Journal of Computer Vision
IS - 1
ER -