![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Matching consists of translating and positioning the template at various locations of the distance image; the matching measure is determined by the pixel values of the distance image which lie under the data pixels of the transformed template. The lower these values are, the better the match between image and template at this location. If, for example, the average distance value lies below a certain threshold, the target object is considered detected. |
||||||||||
The Main Innovations |
||||||||||
Typically, not just one template needs to be matched with an image, but a whole set of templates. These templates can be geometrical transformations of a single reference template (e.g. rotations, scales), or, more general, be examples capturing the set of appearances of a target object. The idea is to derive a representation off-line which exploits any structure in this template distribution, so that, online, matching can proceed optimized. |
||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||
The approach chosen groups similar templates together and represents each group by two entities: a “prototype” template and a distance parameter. The latter needs to capture the dissimilarity between the prototype template and the templates it represents. By matching the prototype template with the image, rather than with the individual templates, one typically achieves a speedup. |
||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||
When applied recursively, shape-clustering leads to a template tree. The tree is constructed automatically, level by level, starting at the leaf level, which contains the example shapes. Matching can now be seen as traversing the template tree. Because the traversal process is typically discontinued at the higher levels of the template tree, one achieves significant efficiency gains compared to a nonhierarchical method. Moreover, matching with the template tree is combined with coarse-to-fine matching on the image grid, resulting in additional efficiency gains. |
||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||
![]() |
||||||||||
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||
![]() |
||||||||
The Chamfer System uses statistical methods to map per-node distance thresholds onto probabilities during training. In online use, rather than having to input thousands of distance thresholds, the user inputs for each level of the tree a threshold on the posterior value, i.e. on the probability that the target object is present considering the matches obtained in a path from the root downto a node at this level. For more information on the Chamfer System, see recent journal article. |
||||||||
Here are a few video-clips to illustrate the results obtained with the Chamfer System. |
||||||||
Traffic Sign Recognition (1999) |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||
© DaimlerChrysler |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
This last video-clip provided an insight of how the system works internally; i.e. how it “locks” onto a given target. It shows matching results at the intermediate levels of a three-level template hierarchy. Image locations where templates of the first, second and leaf level of the hierarchy matched successfully are shown in colors green, blue and red, respectively. Finally, here is a tough scene where there are a lot of vertical structures which can be confused as pedestrians. To handle this, a texture-based RBF classifier is added to verify the candidate solutions obtained by the shape-based detection step. Detections which were positively identified as pedestrians are marked with a STOP icon in the following video clip. |
![]() |
|||||
|
![]() |
|
[Home Gavrila] [Resume] [Research] [People] [Publications] [Datasets] [Media Coverage] [Open Positions] [Search] |
![]() |
![]() |
Copyright © 2001-2006 Gavrila. All rights reserved. Disclaimer. |