Evaluation of Salient Point Techniques
In image retrieval, global features related to color or texture are commonly used to describe the image content. The problem with this approach is that these global features cannot capture all parts of the image having different characteristics. Therefore, local computation of image information is necessary. By using salient points to represent local information, more discriminative features can be computed. In this paper we compare a wavelet-based salient point extraction algorithm with two corner detectors using the criteria: repeatability rate and information content. We also show that extracting color and texture information in the locations given by our salient points provides significantly improved results in terms of retrieval accuracy, computational complexity, and storage space of feature vectors as compared to global feature approaches.
KeywordsFeature Vector Image Retrieval Salient Point Texture Region Retrieval Accuracy
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Haralick, R., Shapiro, L.: Computer and Robot Vision II. Addison-Wesley (1993)Google Scholar
- 4.Harris, C., Stephens, M.: A combined corner and edge detector. Alvey. Vis. Conf. (1993) 147–151Google Scholar
- 5.Loupias, E., Sebe, N.: Wavelet-based salient points: Applications to image retrieval using color and texture features. In: Visual’00. (2000) 223–232Google Scholar
- 8.Sebe, N., Tian, Q., Loupias, E., Lew, M., Huang, T.: Color indexing using wavelet-based salient points. In: IEEE Workshop on Content-based Access of Image and Video Libraries. (2000) 15–19Google Scholar
- 9.Stricker, A., Orengo, M.: Similarity of color images. SPIE-Storage and Retrieval for Image and Video Databases III 2420 (1995) 381–392Google Scholar
- 10.Smith, J., Chang, S.F.: Transform features for texture classification and discrimination in large image databases. Int Conf on Imag Process 3 (1994) 407–411Google Scholar
- 11.Ma, W., Manjunath, B.: A comparison of wavelet transform features for texture image annotation. Int Conf on Imag Process 2 (1995) 256–259Google Scholar