Researchers implemented various similarity measure for CBIR using HSV Quantization. Implemented similarity measures on this study is Euclidean Distance, Cramer-von Mises Divergence, Manhattan Distance, Cosine Similarity, Chi-Square Dissimilarity, Jeffrey Divergence, Pearson Correlation Coefficient, and Mahalanobis Distance. The purpose of study is to measure the performance of image retrieval of the CBIR system using HSV Quantization for each of the similarity measures. The performance of similarity measures are evaluated based on precision, recall, and F-measure value that obtained from test results performed on the Wang dataset. Similarity measures were performed on each of the categories (Africa, Beaches, Building, Bus, Dinosaur, Elephant, Flower, Horses, Mountain, and Food) that has 100 images of each its category. The test results showed that the highest precision valued are 100% provided with Jeffrey Divergence on Dinosaur category. The best average precision value of all categories is provided with Jeffrey Divergence, i.e. 87.298%. In generally, the best average precision value is Dinosaur category (Euclidean Distance, Manhattan Distance, Cosine Similarity, Chi-Square Dissimilarity, Jeffrey Divergence, and Pearson Correlation Coefficient). The next of average precision value is on Flower category for Cramer-von Mises Divergence, and the last category is on Bus category that provided with Mahalanobis Distance. The highest average recall valued is 92% on Horses category that established to Cosine Similarity. The best average recall valued for all categories is on Manhattan Distance, i.e. 38.700%. In generally, the best average recall valued is on Horses category that provided with Cramer-von Mises Divergence, Manhattan Distance, Cosine Similarity, Chi-Square Dissimilarity, Jeffrey Divergence, Pearson Correlation Coefficient, and Mahalanobis Distance. The best average recall value of the Euclidean Distance is Africa category. The highest F-measure value is 87.255% on Horses category provided with Cosine Similarity. The experiment result showed that the highest F-measure valued is always on Horses category. The highest F-measure value in general provided with Manhattan Distance (Africa, Beaches, Building, Bus, Dinosaur, Elephant, Flower, Mountain, and Food), while the highest F-measure valued of Horses category provided with Cosine Similarity.
[1]
K. Rajakumar,et al.
MRI Image Retrieval Using Wavelet with Mahalanobis Distance Measurement
,
2013
.
[2]
Manish K. Shriwas,et al.
Content based image retrieval: A past, present and new feature descriptor
,
2015,
2015 International Conference on Circuits, Power and Computing Technologies [ICCPCT-2015].
[3]
S. M. Isa,et al.
The Robust Distance for Similarity Measure Of Content Based Image Retrieval
,
2009
.
[4]
Amandeep Khokher.
IMAGE RETRIEVAL: A STATE OF THE ART APPROACH FOR CBIR
,
2011
.
[5]
Manish Dixit,et al.
A Review: Relating Low Level Features to High Level Semantics in CBIR
,
2016
.
[6]
Diksha Kurchaniya,et al.
Analysis of Different Similarity Measures in Image Retrieval Based on Texture and Shape
,
2017
.
[7]
Jian-Ping Li,et al.
Content Based Image Retrieval Using Gray Scale Weighted Average Method
,
2016
.
[8]
Meenakshi Garg,et al.
CBIR Approach Based On Combined HSV, Auto Correlogram, Color Moments and Gabor Wavelet
,
2014
.
[9]
S. Niranjanan,et al.
Performance Efficiency of Quantization using HSV Colour Space and Vector Cosine Angle Distance in CBIR with Different Image Sizes
,
2013
.
[10]
Sumit Sharma,et al.
Content Base Image Retrieval using Combination of Color, Shape and Texture Features
,
2013
.
[11]
Meenakshi Sharma,et al.
Analysis of Distance Measures in Content based Image Retrieval
,
2014
.
[12]
Mawloud Mosbah,et al.
Distance selection based on relevance feedback in the context of CBIR using the SFS meta-heuristic with one round
,
2017
.
[13]
A. Bhagyalakshmi,et al.
A survey on content based image retrieval using various operators
,
2014,
Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Communication and Systems ICCCS14.
[14]
Rakesh Kumar,et al.
An Approach for Similarity Matching and Comparison in Content based Image Retrieval System
,
2015
.
[15]
Mrs. P. Nalini.
Review on Content Based Image Retrieval : From Its Origin to the New Age
,
2016
.
[16]
Md. Iqbal Hasan Sarker,et al.
Content-based Image Retrieval Using Haar Wavelet Transform and Color Moment
,
2013,
Smart Comput. Rev..
[17]
John Collins,et al.
A Comparative Study of Similarity Measures for Content-Based Medical Image Retrieval
,
2012,
CLEF.