Towards objective quality assessment of image registration results

VISAPP 2007 - 2nd International Conference on Computer Vision Theory and Applications, Proceedings

Volumn IFP, Issue IA/-, 2007, Pages 233-240

  Möller, Birgit ^a   Garcia, Rafael ^a   Posch, Stefan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GIRONA   (Spain)

^b MARTIN LUTHER UNIVERSITY HALLE WITTENBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Error classification; Image registration; Objective metric; Quality assessment; Voting schemes

Indexed keywords

3D SCENE RECONSTRUCTION; ACCURATE REGISTRATION; COMPUTER VISION APPLICATIONS; CORRECTION OF ERRORS; ERROR CLASSIFICATION; ERROR POOLING; ERROR SOURCES; IMAGE SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; LOCAL STRUCTURE; MOSAICING; MOTION DETECTION; MOTION RECOVERY; NEW APPROACHES; OBJECTIVE MEASURE; OBJECTIVE METRIC; OBJECTIVE QUALITY ASSESSMENT; OPTIMIZATION CRITERIA; OVERALL QUALITY; PROCESSING STEPS; QUALITY ASSESSMENT; QUALITY METRIC; REGISTERED IMAGES; VISUAL APPEARANCE; VISUAL IMAGE; VOTING SCHEMES;

COMPUTER APPLICATIONS; COMPUTER VISION; ERROR CORRECTION; IMAGE REGISTRATION;

THREE DIMENSIONAL;

EID: 45149135540     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (15)

1. Cadik, M. and Slavik, P. (2004). Evaluation of two principal approaches to objective image quality assessment. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Information Visualisation (IV),pages 513-518.
2. Cvejic, N., Loza, A., Bull, D., and Canagarajah, N. (2005). A novel metric for performance evaluation of image fusion algorithms. Transactions on Engineering, Computing and Technology,7:80-85.
3. Daly, S. (1993). The visible difference predictor: An algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity. Digital Images and Human Vision,pages 179-206.
4. Farin, D. and de With, P. (2005). Misregistration errors in change detection algorithms and how to avoid them. In Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Image Processing,pages 11:438-441.
5. Hartley, R. and Zisserman, A. (2004). Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision.Cambridge University Press.
6. Hsu, S. C. and Sawhney, H. S. (1998). Influence of global constraints and lens distortion on pose and appearance recovery from a purely rotating camera. In 4th IEEE Workshop on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV),page 154 ff., Princeton, NJ, USA.
7. Kim, H.-S., Kim, H.-C, Lee, W.-K., and Kim, C.-H. (2000). Stitching reliability for estimating camera focal length in panoramic image mosaicing. In Int. Conf. on Pattern Recognition,pages 1:596-599, Barcelona, Spain.
8. Lubin, J. (1995). A visual discrimination model for imaging system design and evaluation. In Peli, E., editor, Visual Models for Target Detection and Recognition,pages 245-283. World Scientific, Singapore.
9. Mann, S. and Picard, R. (1996). Video orbits of the pro-jective group: A new perspective on image mosaicing. Technical Report 338, MIT Media Laboratory Perceptual Computing Section, Boston, USA.
10. Qu, G., Zhang, D., and Yan, P. (2002). Information measure for performance of image fusion. Electronics Letters,38(7):313-315.
11. Wang, Z., Bovik, A., Sheikh, H., and Simoncelli, E. (2004). Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans, on Image Processing,13(4):600-612.
12. Wang, Z. and Bovik, A. C. (2002). A universal image quality index. IEEE Signal Proc. Letters,9(3):81-84.
13. Weng, J., Huang, S., and Ahuja, N. (1989). Motion and structure from two perspective views: Algorithms, error analysis, and error estimation. IEEE Trans, on Patt. Anal, and Much. Intel,11(5):451-476.
14. Xydeas, C. and Petrović, V. (2000). Objective image fusion performance measure. Electr. Letters,36(4):308-309.
15. Zitová, B. and Flusser, J. (2003). Image registration methods: a survey. Image and Vision Computing,21(ll):977-1000.