A▶ local feature is an image pattern which differs from its immediate neighborhood. It is usually associated with a change of an image property or several properties simultaneously, though it is not necessarily localized exactly on this change. The image properties commonly considered are intensity, color, and texture. Figure 1 shows some examples of local features in a contour image (left) as well as in a grayvalue image (right). Local features can be points, but also edgels or small image patches. Typically, some measurements are taken from a ▶ region centered on a local feature and converted into descriptors. The descriptors can then be used for various applications. Three broad categories of feature ▶ detectors can be distinguished based on their possible usage. It is not exhaustive or the only way of categorizing the features but it emphasizes different properties required by the usage scenarios. First, one might be interested in a specific type of local features, as they may have a specific semantic interpretation in the limited context of a certain application. For instance, edges detected in aerial images often correspond to roads; blob detection can be used to identify impurities in some inspection task; etc. These were the first applications for which local feature detectors have been proposed. Second, one might be interested in local features since they provide a limited set of well localized and individually identifiable anchor points. What the features actually represent is not really relevant, as long as their location can be determined accurately and in a stable manner over time. This is for instance the situation in most matching or tracking applications, and especially for camera calibration or 3D reconstruction. Other application domains include pose estimation, image alignment, or mosaicing. A typical example here is the features used in the KLT tracker [201 Au1 ]. Finally, a set of local features can be used as a robust image representation, that allows to recognize objects or scenes without the need for segmentation. Here again, it does not really matter what the features actually represent. They do not even have to be localized precisely, since the goal is not to match them on an individual basis, but rather to analyze their statistics. This way of exploiting local features was first reported in the seminal work of [187 Au2 ] and soon became very popular, especially in the context of object recognition (both for specific objects as well as for category-level recognition). Other application domains include scene classification, texture analysis, image retrieval, and video mining.
[1]
Cordelia Schmid,et al.
Local Grayvalue Invariants for Image Retrieval
,
1997,
IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..
[2]
Michael J. Swain,et al.
Color indexing
,
1991,
International Journal of Computer Vision.
[3]
Alex Pentland,et al.
Eigenfaces for Face Recognition
,
1991
.
[4]
Richard O. Duda,et al.
Pattern classification and scene analysis
,
1974,
A Wiley-Interscience publication.
[5]
Hiroshi Murase,et al.
Learning and recognition of 3D objects from appearance
,
1993,
[1993] Proceedings IEEE Workshop on Qualitative Vision.
[6]
M. Turk,et al.
Eigenfaces for Recognition
,
1991,
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.
[7]
David L. Milgram,et al.
Computer Methods for Creating Photomosaics
,
1975,
IEEE Transactions on Computers.
[8]
Cordelia Schmid,et al.
A Comparison of Affine Region Detectors
,
2005,
International Journal of Computer Vision.
[9]
Carlo Tomasi,et al.
Good features to track
,
1994,
1994 Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.
[10]
F. Attneave.
Some informational aspects of visual perception.
,
1954,
Psychological review.
[11]
Cordelia Schmid,et al.
A Performance Evaluation of Local Descriptors
,
2005,
IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..
[12]
Azriel Rosenfeld,et al.
Picture Processing by Computer
,
1969,
CSUR.