A comparative evaluation of multimodal dense stereo correspondence measures

In this paper, we compare the behavior of four viable dense stereo correspondence measures, which are Normalized Cross-Correlation (NCC), Histograms of Oriented Gradients (HOG), Mutual Information (MI), and Local Self-Similarity (LSS), for thermal-visible human monitoring. Our comparison is based on a Winner Take All (WTA) box matching stereo method. We evaluate the accuracy and the discriminative power of each correspondence measure using challenging thermal-visible pairs of video frames of different people with different poses, clothing, and distances to cameras for close-range human monitoring applications.

[1]  J. Sarvaiya,et al.  Image Registration by Template Matching Using Normalized Cross-Correlation , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Control, and Telecommunication Technologies.

[2]  Mohan M. Trivedi,et al.  Mutual information based registration of multimodal stereo videos for person tracking , 2007, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[3]  Rafael Mayoral,et al.  Evaluation of Correspondence Errors for Stereo , 2004, ICPR.

[4]  Bill Triggs,et al.  Histograms of oriented gradients for human detection , 2005, 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05).

[5]  Geoffrey Egnal,et al.  Mutual Information as a Stereo Correspondence Measure , 2000 .

[6]  Guillaume-Alexandre Bilodeau,et al.  Local self-similarity as a dense stereo correspondence measure for themal-visible video registration , 2011, CVPR 2011 WORKSHOPS.

[7]  Pramod K. Varshney,et al.  On registration of regions of interest (ROI) in video sequences , 2003, Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance, 2003..

[8]  Óscar Martínez Mozos,et al.  A comparative evaluation of interest point detectors and local descriptors for visual SLAM , 2010, Machine Vision and Applications.

[9]  Richard Szeliski,et al.  A Taxonomy and Evaluation of Dense Two-Frame Stereo Correspondence Algorithms , 2001, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[10]  Eli Shechtman,et al.  Matching Local Self-Similarities across Images and Videos , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[11]  Jan Flusser,et al.  Image registration methods: a survey , 2003, Image Vis. Comput..

[12]  Sridha Sridharan,et al.  Multi-spectral stereo image matching using mutual information , 2004, Proceedings. 2nd International Symposium on 3D Data Processing, Visualization and Transmission, 2004. 3DPVT 2004..

[13]  Heiko Hirschmüller,et al.  Evaluation of Cost Functions for Stereo Matching , 2007, 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.