FRAMEWORK FOR COMPARING SEGMENTATION ALGORITHMS

The notion of a ‘Best’ segmentation does not exist. A segmentation algorithm is chosen based on the features it yields, the properties of the segments (point sets) it generates, and the complexity of its algorithm. The segmentation is then assessed based on a variety of metrics such as homogeneity, heterogeneity, fragmentation, etc. Even after an algorithm is chosen its performance is still uncertain because the landscape/scenarios represented in a point cloud have a strong influence on the eventual segmentation. Thus selecting an appropriate segmentation algorithm is a process of trial and error. Automating the selection of segmentation algorithms and their parameters first requires methods to evaluate segmentations. Three common approaches for evaluating segmentation algorithms are ‘goodness methods’, ‘discrepancy methods’ and ‘benchmarks’. Benchmarks are considered the most comprehensive method of evaluation. This paper shortcomings in current benchmark methods are identified and a framework is proposed that permits both a visual and numerical evaluation of segmentations for different algorithms, algorithm parameters and evaluation metrics. The concept of the framework is demonstrated on a real point cloud. Current results are promising and suggest that it can be used to predict the performance of segmentation algorithms.

[1]  Thomas A. Funkhouser,et al.  A benchmark for 3D mesh segmentation , 2009, ACM Trans. Graph..

[2]  T. Rabbani,et al.  SEGMENTATION OF POINT CLOUDS USING SMOOTHNESS CONSTRAINT , 2006 .

[3]  Thomas Funkhouser,et al.  A benchmark for 3D mesh segmentation , 2009, SIGGRAPH 2009.

[4]  Allan D. Jepson,et al.  Benchmarking Image Segmentation Algorithms , 2009, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[5]  Yee-Hong Yang,et al.  Multiresolution Color Image Segmentation , 1994, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[6]  Qian Huang,et al.  Quantitative methods of evaluating image segmentation , 1995, Proceedings., International Conference on Image Processing.

[7]  J. Hyyppä,et al.  International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol.XXXVI, Part 3 / W52 , 2007 .

[8]  Julien Radoux,et al.  Quality assessment of segmentation results devoted to object-based classification , 2008 .

[9]  Heike Trautmann,et al.  Benchmarking Evolutionary Algorithms: Towards Exploratory Landscape Analysis , 2010, PPSN.

[10]  Y. J. Zhang,et al.  A survey on evaluation methods for image segmentation , 1996, Pattern Recognit..

[11]  Paola Campadelli,et al.  Quantitative evaluation of color image segmentation results , 1998, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[12]  Jianfei Cai,et al.  A benchmark for semantic image segmentation , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME).

[13]  Andrew W. Fitzgibbon,et al.  An Experimental Comparison of Range Image Segmentation Algorithms , 1996, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[14]  William A. Yasnoff,et al.  Error measures for scene segmentation , 1977, Pattern Recognit..

[15]  Martin D. Levine,et al.  Dynamic Measurement of Computer Generated Image Segmentations , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[16]  Siwei Luo,et al.  A benchmark for interactive image segmentation algorithms , 2011, 2011 IEEE Workshop on Person-Oriented Vision.