Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A comparison of object detection algorithms using unmanipulated testing images: Comparing SIFT, KAZE, AKAZE and ORB
KTH, School of Computer Science and Communication (CSC).
KTH, School of Computer Science and Communication (CSC).
2016 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

While the thought of having computers recognize objects in images have been around for a long time it is only in the last 20 years that this has become a reality.One of the first successful recognition algorithms was called SIFT and to this day it is one of the most used. However in recent years new algorithms have beenpublished claiming to outperform SIFT. It is the goal of this report to investigate if SIFT still is the top performer 17 years after its publicationor if the newest generation of algorithms are superior.

By creating a new data-set of over 170 test images with categories such as scale, rotation, illumination and general detectiona thorough test has been run comparing four algorithms, SIFT, KAZE, AKAZE and ORB. The result of this study contradicts the claims from the creators of KAZE and show thatSIFT has higher score on all tests. It also showed that AKAZE is at least as accurate as KAZE while being significantly faster. Another result was that whileSIFT, KAZE and AKAZE were relatively evenly matched when comparing single invariances that changed when performing tests that contained multiple variables. Whentesting detection in cluttered environments SIFT proved vastly superior to the other algorithms. This led to the conclusion that if the goal is the best possibledetection in every-day situations SIFT is still the best algorithm.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016.
National Category
Computer Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-186503OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-186503DiVA: diva2:927480
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2016-05-12 Created: 2016-05-12 Last updated: 2016-05-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(2136 kB)2432 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 2136 kBChecksum SHA-512
09507727281a0bbfbe35d73e136afcc9a62309e4dd693e51245afd237c3881767088f9a3153405339dcf0738e955c3305ed6a5b1ff37e35d8077c02330644ca1
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

By organisation
School of Computer Science and Communication (CSC)
Computer Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 2432 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 4192 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf