Object Recognition using Local Affine Frames on Maximally Stable Extremal Regions Stepan Obdrzalek...

Object Recognition using Local Affine Frames on Maximally Stable Extremal Regions

Stepan Obdrzalek

Jirı Matas

Proposed Algorithm

• Identify affine-covariant regions of interest– MSER detector

• Construct local affine frames (LAFs)– Invariant to geometry and photometrics

• Normalize LAF geometry and color • Generate descriptors of patches

– Discrete cosine transformation

• Recognition & Localization– Establish tentative correspondences– Find a globally consistent subset– Infer presence and location of object

Requirement for Region Detectors• Consistent• Discriminative• Invariant (actually: covariant)

– Appearance is consistent with the transformation• scaling, rotation, shearing

– Fixed shape is insufficient– Shape must be covariant to object position (Sticky)

Popular Affine Covariant Detectors

• Harris-Affine• Hessian-Affine• Edge• Intensity Extrema• Salient Regions• MSER

Harris-affine & Hessian-affine

• Detect interest points– Identify corners in image using Harris corner detector

• Determine the “characteristic” scale – Maximization of Laplacian-of-Gaussians

• Determine an elliptical region for each point– Second moment matrix

Edge based detectorEdges are stable across view, scale, illumination• Detect interest points

– Identify corners in image using Harris corner detector– Identify edges using canny– Combine to form a parallelogram

• Determine the “characteristic” scale – Parallelograms where textures hit an extremum

Intensity based detector

• Detect interest points– Identify local extremum in intensity– Analyze rays projecting radially

• Determine the “characteristic” scale – Best-fit ellipse that passes through ray-points with large intensity shifts

Salient region detectorBased on PDF of intensity values computed over elliptical region• Detect interest points

– Measure the pixel entropy within elliptical regions– Select regions with high “complexity”

• Determine the “characteristic” scale– Optimal scale is determined by the identified region

Maximally Stable Extremal Region (MSER)Connected component of thresholded image

Efficient to implement O(number pixels)• Detect interest points

– All pixels inside the MSER have higher or lower intensities than in the surrounding regions– Regions are selected to be stable over intensity range

• Determine the “characteristic” scale – Optimal scale is automatic to MSER algorithm

Runtime comparison

Local Affine Frame (LAF) from Features

Comparing transformed image regions can be simplified by constructing a viewpoint invariant coordinate system that is feature-based • Coordinates are based on local features

– Coordinates “stick” to features – Features must describe 6 degrees of freedom– Simple points and ellipses are not sufficient– MSER regions are sufficient

• Assumptions– Local planarity– Perspective camera

Local Affine Frame (LAF) from Features

Local Affine Frame (LAF) from Features • 2D affine transformation has 6 degrees of freedom

– 6 independent constraints must be found– Correspondence of 3 non-collinear points– Constraints are derived from detected primitives

Local Affine Frame (LAF) from Features Region shape constructions• Center of gravity

– 2 constraints: resolves translation• 2x2 covariance matrix ∑(ii)

– 3 constraints: Together with COG, fixes affine up to unknown rotation• Concavities

– 4 constraints: line and point tangent to line– Don’t require detection of whole region

• Curvature inflection points–From concave to convex

• Straight line segments of boundary

Local Affine Frame (LAF) from Features

Intensity Constructions: pixels inside a region• Orientations of gradients

– Rotation

• Direction of dominant texture periodicity– Rotaion

• Extrema of RGB or any scalar function– 2 constraints

Local Affine Frame (LAF) from Features

Topology of regions: Mutual configuration of regions• Nested regions• Neighboring regions• Holes• Incident regions

LAF Construction Construction of primitives covering 6 degrees of freedom

Geometric Normalization

• Translate between canonical / image frame– Origin = (0,0)T, Basis Vectors = (1,0)T, (0,1)T

–

• Measurement Region (MR)– Image region used to determine local correspondences– (-2,3) x (-2,3)–

Photometric Normalization

• Translate between canonical / image frame– Reflections and shadows are ignored– Illumination, gain, aperture, etc. is modeled by affine transformations of color channels– Transformation between two patches I and I’ is:–

– Requires 6 additional normalization parameters

• Intensities are affinely transformed to have– zero mean– unit variance

Normalization of Local Representation

• Translate between canonical / image frame– 12 normalization parameters stored with the descriptor

• Coverage

Descriptors

• Desirable properties– Distinguish between large number of regions– Maximize ratio of similarities between match & mismatch– Robust or invariant to localization errors & transformations– Efficient on memory and speed

• Discrete Cosine Transformation (JPEG compression)– Algorithms require O(n lg n)– Hardware implementations– Robust to misalignment– Same discrimination as SIFT

Matching detected frames with query frames

• Comparison– Compute similarities between all detected and query frames

• Matching– Select most likely matches

• Verification– Consistency check that incorporates geometric constraints

Comparison

• Determine the probability that a transformation can take place

– Based on training experience

• If probability is below a threshold, ∞ similarity• Otherwise, determined by descriptor similarity

Matching

• Nearest Match– Most common– For each detected frame, find closest query frame

• Mutually Nearest Match– For symmetric matching (e.g. stereo)– For each detected, find closest query– For each query, find closest detected– Match if (close query = close detected) or (diff < threshold)

• All (or N most) similar– Repetitive structures (many ambiguous correspondences)– Keep all correspondences, resolution left to verification – High number of false correspondences

Verification

• All matches should be consistent with same model• 3D models would only be effective if visible parts of the image are very large (building interiors)• Sufficient to model as planar surfaces

– If 2 tentative correspondences are part of the same plane• Similar geometric transformation• Similar photometric transformation

• Set of all correspondences is decomposed into subsets of consistent correspondences

– Each subset represents a single plane in the scene– Small sets are rejected

Experimental Validation: COIL-100

• 100 objects• 72 images each object• 5º pose intervals• Controlled lighting

Experimental Validation: ZuBuD

• 201 buildings• 5 pictures each

Experimental Validation: FOCUS

• Product logos• Logos occupy small image portion• 360 color images

Conclusion

• Object recognition based on local measurements• Affine invariance achieved by expressing local appearance in terms of affine covariant coordinates• Promising results

• Problems– Speed is the primary issue

• All query compared to all database• Speed improved using hashing, cost may be accuracy

– Planar surface assumption– Rigid objects– Shadow, etc.