Recognition of geons by parametric deformable contour models

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 1064, Issue , 1996, Pages 71-82

  Pilu, Maurizio ^a   Fisher, Robert B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DEFORMATION; SIMULATED ANNEALING;

2D INTENSITY IMAGES; ADAPTIVE SIMULATED ANNEALING; DEFORMABLE CONTOUR MODEL; LINE DRAWINGS; LOCAL PROPERTY; MAXIMUM A POSTERIORI ESTIMATION; MODEL-BASED OPC; REGION SEGMENTATION;

COMPUTER VISION;

EID: 84957537567     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/bfb0015524     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. R. Bergevin. Primal access recognition of visual objects. Technical Report TRCIM- 90-5, Mc Gill University, Canada, February 1990.
2. I. Biederman. Recognition-by-components: A theory of human image understanding. Psychological Review, 94:115-147, 1987.
3. T.O. Binford. Visual perception by computer. In Proceedings of the IEEE System Science and Cybernetic Conference, Miami, December 1971.
4. S.J. Dickinson, A.P. Pentland, and A. Rosenfeld. 3-D Shape Recovery Using Distributed Aspect Matching. IEEE PAMI, 14(2):130-154, 1992.
5. D. Eggert, L. Stark, and K. Bowyer. Aspect graphs and their use in object recognition. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 13:347-375, 1995.
6. P. Fua and A.J. Hanson. Objective functions for feature discrimination: Applications to semiautomated and automated feature extraction. In DARPA Image Understanding Workshop, pages 676-694, 1989.
7. J.E. Hummel and I. Biederman. Dynamic binding in a neural net model for shape recognition. Psychological Review, 99:480-517, 1992.
8. L. Ingber. Adaptive Simulated Annealing. Lester Ingber Research, Mc Lean, VA, 1993. [ftp.alumni.caltech.edu./pub/ingber/ASA.tar.zip].
9. J.R. Kender and D.G. Freudenstaln. What is a "degenerate" view? In DARPA Image Understanding Workshops, pages 589-598, 1987.
10. S. Kirkpatrick, C.D. Gelatt, and M.P. Vecchi. Optimization by simulated armealing. Science, 220:671-680, 1983.
11. Y.G. Leclerc. Constructing simple stable description for image partitioning. International Journal of Computer Vision, 3:73-102, 1989.
12. D. Lowe. Fitting parametrized 3D models to images. PAMI, 13(5):441-450, May 1991.
13. D. Metaxas, S.J. Dickinson, R.C Munck-Fairwood, and L. Du. Integration of quantitative and qualitative techniques for deformable model fitting from orthographic, perspective and stereo projection. In Fourth International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 364-371, 1993.
14. A.P. Pentland. Perceptual organization and the representation of natural form. Artificial Intelligence, 28:293-331, 1986.
15. N.S. Raja and A.K. Jain. Obtaining generic parts from range data using a multiview representation. In Appl. Artif. Intell. X: Machine Vision and Robotics, Proc. SPIE 1708, pages 602-613, Orlando, FL, April 1992.
16. F. Solina and R. Bajcsy. Recovery of parametric models from range images: The case of superquadrics with global deformations. IEEE PAMI, 12(2):131-147, February 1990.
17. K. Wu and M.D. Levine. Recovering of parametric geons from multiview range data. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Seattle, WA, 1994.