Shape matching by part alignment using extended chordal axis transform

One of the main challenges in shape matching is overcoming intra-class variation where objects that are conceptually similar have significant geometric dissimilarity. The key to a solution around this problem is incorporating the structure of the object in the shape descriptor which can be described by a connectivity graph customarily extracted from its skeleton. In a slightly different perspective, the structure may also be viewed as the arrangement of protruding parts along its boundary. This arrangement does not only convey the protruding part's ordering along the anti clockwise direction, but also these parts on different levels of detail. In this paper, we propose a shape matching method that estimates the distance between two objects by conducting a part-to-part matching analysis between their visual protruding parts. We start by a skeleton-based segmentation of the shape inspired by the Chordal Axis Transform. Then, we extract the segments that represent the protruding parts in its silhouette on varied levels of detail. Each one of these parts is described by a feature vector. A shape is thus described by the feature vectors of its parts in addition to their angular and linear proximities to each other. Using dynamic programming, our algorithm finds a minimal cost correspondence between parts. Our experimental evaluations validate the proposition that part correspondence allows conceptual matching of precisely dissimilar shapes. HighlightsNew concepts employed in skeletonization and segmentation of 2D shapes.Experimentally weighing geometric properties in visual part salience measure.Shape retrieval visual parts distance measures rather than boundary points.A new approach to 2D shape alignment based on part correspondence.

[1]  Cong Lin,et al.  Shape Classification Using Hybrid Regional and Global Descriptor , 2014 .

[2]  Wen Gao,et al.  Computing importance of 2D contour parts by reconstructability , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (ICCV Workshops).

[3]  Aykut Erdem,et al.  A similarity-based approach for shape classification using Aslan skeletons , 2010, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[4]  Mubarak Shah,et al.  Shape matching and modeling using skeletal context , 2008, Pattern Recognit..

[5]  Longin Jan Latecki,et al.  Skeleton-Based Shape Classification Using Path Similarity , 2008, Int. J. Pattern Recognit. Artif. Intell..

[6]  Philip N. Klein,et al.  Recognition of shapes by editing their shock graphs , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[7]  Stephen DiVerdi,et al.  Learning part-based templates from large collections of 3D shapes , 2013, ACM Trans. Graph..

[8]  Wenyu Liu,et al.  Bag of contour fragments for robust shape classification , 2014, Pattern Recognit..

[9]  Manish Singh,et al.  Geometric determinants of shape segmentation: Tests using segment identification , 2007, Vision Research.

[10]  Aaron E. Rosenberg,et al.  Performance tradeoffs in dynamic time warping algorithms for isolated word recognition , 1980 .

[11]  Manish Singh,et al.  An Integrated Bayesian Approach to Shape Representation and Perceptual Organization , 2013, Shape Perception in Human and Computer Vision.

[12]  Boaz J. Super,et al.  Classification of contour shapes using class segment sets , 2005, 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05).

[13]  Wenyu Liu,et al.  Skeleton Pruning by Contour Partitioning with Discrete Curve Evolution , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[14]  Mohammad Reza Daliri,et al.  Robust symbolic representation for shape recognition and retrieval , 2008, Pattern Recognit..

[15]  Jitendra Malik,et al.  Shape matching and object recognition using shape contexts , 2010, 2010 3rd International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology.

[16]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  Key Visual Features for Rapid Categorization of Animals in Natural Scenes , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[17]  E. Hancock,et al.  A Skeletal Measure of 2D Shape Similarity , 2001 .

[18]  Mohammad Reza Daliri,et al.  Classification of silhouettes using contour fragments , 2009, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[19]  Wooi-Boon Goh,et al.  Strategies for shape matching using skeletons , 2008, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[20]  Lakshman Prasad Rectification of the chordal axis transform skeleton and criteria for shape decomposition , 2007, Image Vis. Comput..

[21]  Philip N. Klein,et al.  Recognition of Shapes by Editing Shock Graphs , 2001, ICCV.

[22]  Donald D. Hoffman,et al.  Parts of recognition , 1984, Cognition.

[23]  Junwei Wang,et al.  Shape matching and classification using height functions , 2012, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[24]  Rahul Rai,et al.  Fragmentary shape recognition: A BCI study , 2016, Comput. Aided Des..

[25]  Philip N. Klein,et al.  Shock-Based Indexing into Large Shape Databases , 2002, ECCV.

[26]  J. Wagemans,et al.  Segmentation of object outlines into parts: A large-scale integrative study , 2006, Cognition.

[27]  Slimane Larabi,et al.  Curve normalization for shape retrieval , 2014, Signal Process. Image Commun..

[28]  Ghassan Hamarneh,et al.  A Survey on Shape Correspondence , 2011, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[29]  Song Wang,et al.  Two perceptually motivated strategies for shape classification , 2010, 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[30]  Dana H. Ballard,et al.  Computer Vision , 1982 .

[31]  I. Biederman Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[32]  Longin Jan Latecki,et al.  From partial shape matching through local deformation to robust global shape similarity for object detection , 2011, CVPR 2011.

[33]  Edwin R. Hancock,et al.  Discovering Shape Classes using Tree Edit-Distance and Pairwise Clustering , 2007, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[34]  Aykut Erdem,et al.  Disconnected Skeleton: Shape at Its Absolute Scale , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[35]  Hiok Chai Quek,et al.  A novel framework for making dominant point detection methods non-parametric , 2012, Image Vis. Comput..

[36]  C. B. Cave,et al.  The Role of Parts and Spatial Relations in Object Identification , 1993, Perception.

[37]  M. Bertamini,et al.  Processing convexity and concavity along a 2-D contour: figure–ground, structural shape, and attention , 2013, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[38]  Sven J. Dickinson,et al.  Skeleton based shape matching and retrieval , 2003, 2003 Shape Modeling International..

[39]  Longin Jan Latecki,et al.  Shape Similarity and Visual Parts , 2003, DGCI.

[40]  Kpalma Kidiyo,et al.  A Survey of Shape Feature Extraction Techniques , 2008 .

[41]  J. Wagemans The Oxford handbook of perceptual organization , 2015 .

[42]  Zhuowen Tu,et al.  Integrating contour and skeleton for shape classification , 2009, 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops, ICCV Workshops.

[43]  Peter Neri,et al.  Wholes and subparts in visual processing of human agency , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[44]  I. V. Higgins,et al.  The role of independent motion in object segmentation in the ventral visual stream: Learning to recognise the separate parts of the body , 2011, Vision Research.