Rapid Online Analysis of Local Feature Detectors and Their Complementarity

A vision system that can assess its own performance and take appropriate actions online to maximize its effectiveness would be a step towards achieving the long-cherished goal of imitating humans. This paper proposes a method for performing an online performance analysis of local feature detectors, the primary stage of many practical vision systems. It advocates the spatial distribution of local image features as a good performance indicator and presents a metric that can be calculated rapidly, concurs with human visual assessments and is complementary to existing offline measures such as repeatability. The metric is shown to provide a measure of complementarity for combinations of detectors, correctly reflecting the underlying principles of individual detectors. Qualitative results on well-established datasets for several state-of-the-art detectors are presented based on the proposed measure. Using a hypothesis testing approach and a newly-acquired, larger image database, statistically-significant performance differences are identified. Different detector pairs and triplets are examined quantitatively and the results provide a useful guideline for combining detectors in applications that require a reasonable spatial distribution of image features. A principled framework for combining feature detectors in these applications is also presented. Timing results reveal the potential of the metric for online applications. © 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland

Comparing Feature Detectors: A bias in the repeatability criteria, and how to correct it

Most computer vision application rely on algorithms finding local correspondences between different images. These algorithms detect and compare stable local invariant descriptors centered at scale-invariant keypoints. Because of the importance of the problem, new keypoint detectors and descriptors are constantly being proposed, each one claiming to perform better (or to be complementary) to the preceding ones. This raises the question of a fair comparison between very diverse methods. This evaluation has been mainly based on a repeatability criterion of the keypoints under a series of image perturbations (blur, illumination, noise, rotations, homotheties, homographies, etc). In this paper, we argue that the classic repeatability criterion is biased towards algorithms producing redundant overlapped detections. To compensate this bias, we propose a variant of the repeatability rate taking into account the descriptors overlap. We apply this variant to revisit the popular benchmark by Mikolajczyk et al., on classic and new feature detectors. Experimental evidence shows that the hierarchy of these feature detectors is severely disrupted by the amended comparator.Comment: Fixed typo in affiliation