Skeleton Graph Matching Based on Critical Points Using Path Similarity

  • Yao Xu
  • Bo Wang
  • Wenyu Liu
  • Xiang Bai
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5996)


This paper proposes a novel graph matching algorithm based on skeletons and applies it to shape recognition based on object silhouettes. The main idea is to match the critical points (junction points and end points) on skeleton graphs by comparing the geodesic paths between end points and junction points of the skeleton. Our method is motivated by the fact that junction points can carry information about the global structure of an object while paths between junction points and end points can represent specific geometric information of local parts. Our method yields the promising accuracy rates on two shape datasets in the presence of articulations, stretching, boundary deformations, part occlusion and rotation.


Skeleton skeleton graph graph matching shape recognition path similarity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Lowe, D.G.: Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. IJCV 60, 91–110 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blum, H.: Biological shape and visual science. J. Theor. Biol. 38, 205–287 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bai, X., Latecki, L.J., Liu, W.Y.: Skeleton pruning by contour partitioning with discrete curve evolution. IEEE Trans. PAMI 29, 449–462 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhu, S.C., Yuille, A.L.: Forms: A flexible object recognition and modeling system. IJCV 20, 187–212 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Siddiqi, K., Shkoufandeh, A., Dickinson, S., Zucker, S.: Shock graphs and shape matching. In: ICCV, pp. 222–229 (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sebastian, T.B., Klein, P.N., Kimia, B.B.: Recognition of shapes by editing their shock graphs. IEEE Trans. PAMI 26, 550–571 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu, T., Geiger, D.: Approximate tree matching and shape similarity. In: ICCV, pp. 456–462 (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Geiger, D., Liu, T., Kohn, R.: Representation and self-similarity of shapes. IEEE Trans. PAMI 25, 86–99 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Demirci, F., Shokoufandeh, A., Keselman, Y., Bretzner, L., Dickinson, S.: Object recognition as many-to-many feature matching. IJCV 69, 203–222 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aslan, C., Tari, S.: An axis based representation for recognition. In: ICCV, pp. 1339–1346 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bai, X., Latecki, L.J.: Path similarity skeleton graph matching. IEEE Trans. PAMI 30, 1282–1292 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ling, H., Jacobs, D.W.: Shape classification using inner-distance. IEEE Trans. PAMI 29, 286–299 (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baseski, E., Erdem, A., Tari, S.: Dissimilarity between two skeletal trees in a context. Pattern Recognition 42, 370–385 (2009)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yao Xu
    • 1
  • Bo Wang
    • 1
  • Wenyu Liu
    • 1
  • Xiang Bai
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Electronics and Information EngineeringHuazhong University of Science and TechnologyWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations