Performance Evaluation of Image Segmentation
In spite of significant advances in image segmentation techniques, evaluation of these methods thus far has been largely subjective. Typically, the effectiveness of a new algorithm is demonstrated only by the presentation of a few segmented images that are evaluated by some method, or it is otherwise left to subjective evaluation by the reader. We propose a new approach for evaluation of segmentation that takes into account not only the accuracy of the boundary localization of the created segments but also the under-segmentation and over-segmentation effects, regardless to the number of regions in each partition. In addition, it takes into account the way humans perceive visual information. This new metric can be applied both to automatically provide a ranking among different segmentation algorithms and to find an optimal set of input parameters of a given algorithm.
KeywordsGround Truth Image Segmentation Segmentation Algorithm Segmentation Evaluation Segmentation Mask
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Gelasca, E.D., Ebrahimi, T., Farias, M.C.Q., Carli, M., Mitra, S.K.: Towards perceptually driven segmentation evaluation metrics. In: Proc. IEEE Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshop, vol. 4, p. 52 (2004)Google Scholar
- 3.Huang, Q., Dom, Byron: Quantitative methods of evaluating image segmentation. In: Proc. IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, vol. III, pp. 53–56 (1995)Google Scholar
- 5.Martin, D., Fowlkes, C.: The Berkeley segmentation database and benchmark, online at, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/projects/vision/grouping/segbench/
- 6.Martin, D.: An empirical approach to grouping and segmentation, Ph.D dissertation, University of California, Berkeley (2002)Google Scholar
- 7.Mezaris, V., Kompatsiaris, I., Strintzis, M.G.: Still image objective segmentation evaluation using ground truth. In: Proc. of 5th COST 276 Workshop, pp. 9–14 (2003)Google Scholar
- 8.Odet, C., Belaroussi, B., Cattin, H.B.: Scalable discrepancy measures for segmentation evaluation. In: Proc. Intern. Conf. on Image Processing, vol. I, pp. 785–788 (2002)Google Scholar