International Journal of Computer Vision

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 7–32 | Cite as

A study of affine matching with bounded sensor error

  • W. Eric L. Grimson
  • Daniel P. Huttenlocher
  • David W. Jacobs


Affine transformations of the plane have been used in a number of model-based recognition systems. Because the underlying mathematics are based on exact data, in practice various heuristics are used to adapt the methods to real data where there is positional uncertainty. This paper provides a precise analysis of affine point matching under uncertainty. We obtain an expression for the range of affine-invariant values that are consistent with a given set of four points, where each image point lies in an ∈-disc of uncertainty. This range is shown to depend on the actualx-y-positions of the data points. In other words, given uncertainty in the data there are no representations that are invariant with respect to the Cartesian coordinate system of the data. This is problematic for methods, such as geometric hashing, that are based on affine-invariant representations. We also analyze the effect that uncertainty has on the probability that recognition methods using affine transformations will find false positive matches. We find that there is a significant probability of false positives with even moderate levels of sensor error, suggesting the importance of good verification techniques and good grouping techniques.


Computer Vision Recognition System Cartesian Coordinate System Significant Probability Precise Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ballard, D.H., 1981, “Generalizing the Hough Transform to Detect Arbitrary Patterns,”Pattern Recognition 13(2):111–122.Google Scholar
  2. Basri, R. & S. Ullman, 1988, “The Alignment of Objects with Smooth Surfaces,”Second Int. Conf. Comp. Vision, 482–488.Google Scholar
  3. Besl, P.J. & R.C. Jain, 1985, “Three-dimensional Object Recognition,”ACM Computing Surveys, 17(1):75–154.Google Scholar
  4. Costa, M., R.M. Haralick & L.G. Shapiro, 1990, “Optimal Affine-Invariant Point Matching,”Proc. 6th Israel Conf. on AI, pp. 35–61.Google Scholar
  5. Cyganski, D. & J.A. Orr, 1985, “Applications of Tensor Theory to Object Recognition and Orientation Determination”,IEEE Trans. PAMI, 7(6):662–673.Google Scholar
  6. DeMenthon, D.F. & L.S. Davis, 1992, “Model-Based Object Pose in 25 Lines of Code,”Second Europ. Conf. Comp. Vision, pp. 335–343.Google Scholar
  7. Efimov, N.V., 1980,Higher Geometry, translated by P.C. Sinha. Mir Publishers, Moscow.Google Scholar
  8. Ellis, R.E., 1989, “Uncertainty Estimates for Polyhedral Object Recognition, ”IEEE Int. Conf. Rob. Aut., pp. 348–353.Google Scholar
  9. Forsyth, D., J.L. Mundy, A. Zisserman, C. Coelho, A. Heller, C. Rothwell, 1991, “Invariant Descriptors for 3-D Object Recognition and Pose”,IEEE Trans. PAMI, 13(10):971–991.Google Scholar
  10. Gavrila, D.M. & F.C.A. Groen, 1992, “3D Object Recognition from 2D Images Using Geometric Hashing,” 13(4):263–278.Google Scholar
  11. Grimson, W.E.L., 1990,Object Recognition by Computer: The role of geometric constraints, MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  12. Grimson, W.E.L., 1990, “The Combinatorics of Heuristic Search Termination for Object Recognition in Cluttered Environments,”First Europ. Conf. on Comp. Vis., pp. 552–556.Google Scholar
  13. Grimson, W.E.L. & D.P. Huttenlocher, 1990, “On the Sensitivity of the Hough Transform for Object Recognition,”IEEE Trans. PAMI 12(3):255–274.Google Scholar
  14. tGrimson, W.E.L. & D.P. Huttenlocher, 1990, “On the Sensitivity of Geometric Hashing”,Proc. Third Int. Conf. Comp. Vision, pp. 334–338.Google Scholar
  15. Grimson, W.E.L. & D.P. Huttenlocher, 1991, “On the Verification of Hypothesized Matches in Model-Based Recognition”,IEEE Trans. PAMI 13(12):1201–1213.Google Scholar
  16. Grimson, W.E.L., D.P. Huttenlocher, & T.D. Alter, 1992, “Recognizing 3D Objects from 2D Images: An Error Analysis,”Proc. CVPR.Google Scholar
  17. Grimson, W.E.L., D.P. Huttenlocher, & D.W. Jacobs, 1991, “Affine Matching With Bounded Sensor Error: A Study of Geometric Hashing & Alignment,” MIT AI Lab Memo 1250.Google Scholar
  18. Guéziec, A. & N. Ayache, 1992, “Smoothing and Matching of 3D Space Curves, ”Proc. Second Europ. Conf. Comp. Vision, pp. 620–629.Google Scholar
  19. Horaud, R., B. Conio, & O. Leboulleux, 1989, “An Analytic Solution for the Perspective-4-Point Problem”Comp. Vis. Graph. Im. Proc, 47:33–44.Google Scholar
  20. Huttenlocher, D.P. and S. Ullman, 1987, “Object Recognition Using Alignment”,Proc. First Int. Conf. Comp. Vision, pp. 102–111.Google Scholar
  21. Huttenlocher, D.P. & S. Ullman, 1990, “Recognizing Solid Objects by Alignment with an Image,”Inter. Journ. Comp. Vision 5 (2):195–212.Google Scholar
  22. Jacobs, D., 1991, “Optimal Matching of Planar Models in 3D Scenes,”IEEE Conf. Comp. Vis. and Patt. Recog. pp. 269–274.Google Scholar
  23. Klein, F., 1939,Elementary Mathematics from an Advanced Standpoint: Geometry, MacMillan, New York.Google Scholar
  24. Korn, G.A. & T.M. Korn, 1968,Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Lamdan, Y., J.T. Schwartz & H.J. Wolfson, 1988a, “On Recognition of 3-D Objects from 2-D Images,”IEEE Int. Conf. Rob. Aut. pp. 1407–1413.Google Scholar
  26. Lamdan, Y., J.T. Schwartz & H.J. Wolfson, 1988, “Object Recognition by Affine Invariant Matching,”IEEE Conf. Comp. Vis. and Patt. Recog. pp. 335–344.Google Scholar
  27. Lamdan, Y., J.T. Schwartz & H.J. Wolfson, 1990, “Affine Invariant Model-Based Object Recognition,”IEEE Trans. Rob. Aut., vol. 6, pp. 578–589.Google Scholar
  28. Lamdan, Y. & H.J. Wolfson, 1988, “Geometric Hashing: A General and Efficient Model-Based Recognition Scheme,”Second Int. Conf. Comp. Vis. pp. 238–249.Google Scholar
  29. Lamdan, Y. & H.J. Wolfson, 1991, “On the Error Analysis of ‘Geometric Hashing’,”IEEE Conf. Comp. Vis. and Patt. Recog. pp. 22–27.Google Scholar
  30. Rigoutsos, I. & Hummel, R., 1991, “Robust Similarity Invariant Matching in the Presence of Noise,”Eighth Israeli Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computer Vision, Tel Aviv.Google Scholar
  31. Rigoutsos, I. & Hummel, R., 1991, “Several Results on Affine Invariant Geometric Hashing,”Eighth Israeli Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computer Vision, Tel Aviv.Google Scholar
  32. Rigoutsos, I. & Hummel, R., 1993, “Distributed Bayesian Object Recognition,”IEEE Conf. Comp. Vis. and Patt. Recog. pp. 180–186.Google Scholar
  33. Sarachik, K.B. & W.E.L. Grimson, 1992, “Gaussian Error Models for Recognition”MIT AI Lab Memo.Google Scholar
  34. Thompson, D. & J.L. Mundy, 1987, “Three-Dimensional Model Matching From an Unconstrained Viewpoint”,Proc. IEEE Conf. Rob. Aut. pp. 280.Google Scholar
  35. Van Gool, L., P. Kempenaers & A. Oosterlinck, 1991, “Recognition and Semi-Differential Invariants,”EEE Conf. Comp. Vis. and Patt. Recog. pp. 454–460.Google Scholar
  36. Wayner, P.C, 1991, “Efficiently Using Invariant Theory for Model-based Matching,”IEEE Conf. Comp. Vis. and Patt. Recog. pp. 473–478.Google Scholar
  37. Weiss, I., 1988, “Projective Invariants of Shape,”DARPA IU Workshop pp. 1125–1134.Google Scholar
  38. Wells, W, 1991, “MAP Model Matching,”IEEE Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 486–492.Google Scholar
  39. Wolfson, H.J., 1990, “Model Based Object Recognition by Geometric Hashing,”First Europ. Conf. Comp. Vis. pp. 526–536.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. Eric L. Grimson
    • 1
  • Daniel P. Huttenlocher
    • 2
    • 3
  • David W. Jacobs
    • 4
  1. 1.AI Lab, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  3. 3.Xerox PARCPalo AltoUSA
  4. 4.NEC Research InstitutePrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations