Fragmentation in the vision of scenes

Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision

Volumn 1, Issue , 2003, Pages 130-135

  Geusebroek, Jan Mark ^a   Smeulders, Arnold W M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL COMPLEXITY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; IMAGE COMPRESSION; IMAGE SEGMENTATION; INTEGRAL EQUATIONS; INTEGRATION; LAPLACE TRANSFORMS; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; WEIBULL DISTRIBUTION;

IMAGE STATISTICS; SEQUENTIAL FRAGMENTATION;

COMPUTER VISION;

EID: 0344120310     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/iccv.2003.1238326     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Corel gallery. see www.corel.com.
2. H. B. Barlow, Possible principles underlying the transformation of sensory messages. In W. Rosenblith, editor, Sensory Communication, page 217. MIT Press, 1961.
3. A. J. Bell and T. J. Sejnowski. The independent components of natural scenes are edge filters. Vision Res., 37:3327-3338, 1997.
4. W. K. Brown, A theory of sequential fragmentation and its astronomical applications. J. Astrophys. Astr., 10:89-112, 1989.
5. W.K. Brown and K.H. Wohletz. Derivation of the weibull distribution based on physical principles and its connection to the rosin-rammler and lognormal distributions. J. Appl. Phys., 78:2758-2763, 1995.
6. K. J. Dana, B. van Ginneken, S. K. Nayar, and J. J. Koenderink. Reflectance and texture of real world surfaces. ACM Trans Graphics, 18: 1-34, 1999.
7. J. J. Filliben et al. NIST/SEMTECH Engineering Statistics Handbook. www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook, NIST, Gaithersburg, 2002.
8. J. M. Geusebroek and A. W. M. Smeulders. A physical explanation for natural image statistics. In M. Chantler, editor, Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Texture Analysis and Synthesis (Texture 2002), pages 47-52. Heriot-Watt University, 2002.
9. J.M. Geusebroek, R. van den Boomgaard, A. W. M. Smeulders, and H. Geerts. Color invariance. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell., 23(12):1338-1350, 2001.
10. B. V. Gnedenko and A. N. Kolmogorov. Limit Distributions for Sums of Independent Random Variables. Addison-Wesley, Boston, 1968.
11. U. Grenander and A. Srivastava. Probability models for clutter in natural images. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell., 23(4):424-429, 2001.
12. J. J. Koenderink, The structure of images. Biol. Cybern., 50:363-370, 1984.
13. A. B. Lee, D. Mumford, and J. Huang. Occlusion models for natural images: A statistical study of a scale-invariant dead leaves model. Int. J. Comput. Vision, 41:35-59, 2001.
14. S. G. Mallat. A theory for multiresolution signal decomposition: The wavelet representation. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell., 11: 674-693, 1989.
15. G. Matheron. Random Sets and Integral Geometry. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1975.
16. A. P. Pentland. Fractal-based description of natural scenes. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell., 6:661-674, 1984.
17. S. E. Rigdon. Testing goodness-of-fit for the power law process. Commun. Statist.-Theory Meth., 18:4665-4676, 1989.
18. D. L. Ruderman and W. Bialek. Statistics of natural images: Scaling in the woods. Phys. Rev. Lett., 73:814-817, 1994.
19. E. P. Simoncelli. Modeling the joint statistics of images in the wavelet domain. In Proc. SPIE, volume 3813, pages 188-195. SPIE, 1999.
20. A. Srivastava, X. Liu, and U. Grenander. Universal analytical forms for modeling image probabilities. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Machine Intell., 24(9):1200-1214, 2002.
21. M. A. Stephens. EDF statistics for goodness of fit and some comparisons. J. Am. Statist. Assoc., 69:730-737, 1974.
22. J.H. van Hateren and A. van der Schaaf. Independent component filters of natural images compared with simple cells in primary visual cortex. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 265:359-366, 1998.
23. W. Weibull. A statistical distribution function of wide applicability. J. Appl. Mech., 18:293-297, 1951.