I've a bunch of expereince in 3D rendering from a game-dev perspective but very little with serious toolkits like VTK.
We have a 3D model of a medical device which has a couple of degrees of motion, and we need to visualise this, animated, in a medical application alongside DICOM datasets.
In a 3D engine we'd likely have option to keyframes, morph-targets, skeletal rigging... but I cannot find out what VTK supports (skeleton/bone are bad search terms as most uses are medical!)
Can someone enumerate what options are provided and point me where in the docs this is covered?
I am not aware of any concise "documentation of VTK animation methods" (doesn't mean there isn't one though), but I will at least share what I know. First off, I doubt that there is some really great state-of-the-art solution included in the base VTK, personally I would look for algorithms that are good enough for me (produce high quality animation) and then try to find an open source implementation of them rather than the other way around. Try including "non-rigid transformation / animation" in your search.
Anyway, two things I know of that are in VTK: there is a filter for Mean Value Coordinates morphing, https://www.vtk.org/doc/nightly/html/classvtkDeformPointSet.html, which you can use for a cage-based deformation (which is perhaps not the most user friendly for creating animations) or in theory could be used for rigging as well (never tried that, but right now I can't see why it wouldn't work). Next, there is an Iterative Closest Point morphing filter https://www.vtk.org/doc/nightly/html/classvtkIterativeClosestPointTransform.html that you could use for morphing by key frames.
I am working on an open source package for robot owners. I want to do a decent job of detecting when the robot is having movement problems. One of the problems the robot commonly has is that the back wheel gets "tucked underneath" in a bad way and makes it turn very slowly when on carpet. I believe that with a combination of accelerometer value inspection and (I hope) a relatively simple yet robust vision analysis technique, I will be able to tell when the robot is having this specific problem.
What I need is to be able to analyze two images, separated by about 1/2 second in time, and get a numerical value that tells about how close they are, but in a way that has some intelligence about the objects in the screen instead of just a simple color/hue/etc. analysis. I've heard of an algorithm called optical flow that is used in object and scene tracking, but I'm hoping I don't need something heavyweight.
Is there an machine vision algorithm/function that can analyze two JPEG's and tell if they belong to the same scene and viewpoint, yet can also deliver a numerical monotonically increasing value that tells me rough how different they are? If I could get that numerical value and compare it to the number of milliseconds past, while examining the current accelerometer activity, I believe I can detect when the robot is having the "slow turn of death" problem.
If so, please tell me the basic technique involved, and if you know of machine vision library that implements it, which one it is.
but in a way that has some intelligence about the objects in the screen instead of just a simple color/hue/etc. analysis
What you are suggesting is a complex problem by itself, so forget about 'lightweight' solutions. Probably you are going to need something like optical flow.
Other options I would recommend you looking into are:
Vanishing points detection and variation from image to image. This quite fits into your problem domain Wikipedia
Disparity map: related to optical flow. Used for stereographic vision, but I think you can use it for the kind of application you are looking for. Take a look at this
I am working on a computer vision application and I am stuck at a conceptual roadblock. I need to recognize a set of logos in a video, and so far I have been using feature matching methods like SIFT (and ASIFT by Yu and Morel), SURF, FERNS -- basically everything in the "Common Interfaces of Generic Descriptor Matchers" section of the OpenCV documentation. But recently I have been researching methods used in OCR/Random Trees classifier (I was playing with this dataaset: http://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/Letter+Recognition) and thinking that this might be a better way to go about finding the logos. The problem is that I can't find a reliable way to automatically segment an arbitrary image.
My questions:
Should I bother looking into methods other than descriptor/keypoint, or is this the
best way to recognize a typical logo (stylized, few colors, sharp edges)?
How can I segment an arbitary image (or a video frame, in my case) so that I can properly
match against a sample database?
It would seem that HaarCascades work in a similar way (databases of samples), but I
can't figure out how the processes are related. Is there segmentation going on there?
Sorry of these questions are too broad. I'm trying to wrap my head around this stuff with little help. Thanks!
It seems like segmentation is not what you want. I think it has to do more with object detection and recognition. You want to detect the presence of a certain set of logos, in a certain set of images. This doesn't seem related to segmentation which is about labeling surfaces or areas of a common color, texture, shape, etc., although examining segmentation based methods may be useful.
I would definitely encourage you to look at problem and examine all possible methods that can be applied, not only the fashionable ones (such as SIFT, GLOH, SURF, etc). I would recommend you look at older, simpler methods like simple template matching, chamfering, etc.
Haar cascades became popular after a 2000 paper by Viola and Jones used for face detection (similar to what you see in modern point and click cameras). It does sound a bit similar to the problem you are interested in. You should perhaps also examine this part of the problem, but try not to focus too much on the learning part.
I had an idea for which I need to be able to recognize certain objects or models from a rendered three dimensional digital movie.
After limited research, I know now that what I need is called feature detection in the field of Computer Vision.
So, what I want to do is:
create a few screenshots of a certain character in the movie (eg. front/back/leftSide/rightSide)
play the movie
while playing the movie, continuously create new screenshots of the movie
for each screenshot, perform feature detection (SIFT?, with openCV?) to see if any of our character appearances are there (they must still be recognized if the character is further away and thus appears smaller, or if the character is eg. lying down).
give a notice whenever the character is found
This would be possible with OpenCV, right?
The "issue" is that I would have to learn c++ or python to develop this application. This is not a problem if my movie and screenshots are applicable for what I want to do.
So, I would like to first test my screenshots of the movie. Is there a GUI version of OpenCV that I can input my test data and then execute it's feature detection algorithms manually as a means of prototyping?
Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks.
There is no GUI of OpenCV able to do what you want. You will be able to use OpenCV for some aspects of your problem, but there is no ready-made solution waiting there for you.
While it's definitely possible to solve your problem, the learning curve for this problem is quite long. If you're a professional, then an alternative to learning about it yourself would be to hire an expert to do it for you. It would cost money, but save you time.
EDIT
As far as template matching goes, you wouldn't normally use it to solve such a problem because the thing you're looking for is changing appearance and shape. There aren't really any "dynamic parameters to set". The closest thing you could try is have a massive template collection that would try to cover the expected forms that your target may take. But it would hardly be an elegant solution. Plus it wouldn't scale.
Next, to your point about face recognition. This is kind of related, but most facial recognition applications deal with a controlled environment: lighting, distance, pose, angle, etc. Outside of that controlled environment face detection effectiveness drops significantly. If you're detecting objects in a movie, then your environment isn't really controlled.
You may want to first try a simpler problem of accurately detecting where the characters are, without determining who they are (video surveillance, essentially). While it may sound simple, you'll find that it's actually non-trivial for arbitrary scenes. The result of solving that problem may be useful in identifying the characters.
There is Find-Object by Mathieu Labbé. It was very helpful for me to start getting an understanding of the descriptors since you can change them while your video is running to see what happens.
This is probably too late, but might help someone else looking for a solution.
Well, using OpenCV you would of taking a frame of a video file and do any computations on it.
You can do several different methods of detecting a character on that image, but it's not so easy to have it as flexible so you can even get that person if it's lying on the floor for example, if you only entered reference images of that character standing.
Basically you could try extracting all important features from your set of reference pictures and have a (in your case supervised) learning algorithm that gets a good feature-vector of that character for classification.
You then need to write your code that plays the video and which takes a video frame let's say each 500ms (or other as you desire), gets a segmentation of the object you thing would be that character and compare it with the reference values you get from your learning algorithm. If there's a match, your code can yell "Yehaaawww!" or do other things...
But all this depends on how flexible you want this to be. You could also try a template match or cross-correlation which basically shifts the reference image(s) over the frame and checks how equal both parts are. But this unfortunately is very sensitive for rotation, deformations or other noise... so you wouldn't get that person if its i.e. laying down. And I doubt you can get all those calculations done in realtime...
Basically: Yes OpenCV is good to use for your image processing/computer vision tasks. But it offers a lot of methods and ways and you'd need to find a way that works for your images... it's not a trivial task though...
Hope that helps...
Have you tried looking at some of the work of the Oxford visual geometry group?
Their Video Google system describes to a large extent what you want, instance detection.
Their work into Naming People in TV shows is also pretty relevant. A face detection and facial feature pipeline is included that can be run from Matlab. Are you familiar with Matlab?
Have you tried computer vision frameworks like Cassandra? There you can exactly do that just by some mouse clicks.
A developer I am working with is developing a program that analyzes images of pavement to find cracks in the pavement. For every crack his program finds, it produces an entry in a file that tells me which pixels make up that particular crack. There are two problems with his software though:
1) It produces several false positives
2) If he finds a crack, he only finds small sections of it and denotes those sections as being separate cracks.
My job is to write software that will read this data, analyze it, and tell the difference between false-positives and actual cracks. I also need to determine how to group together all the small sections of a crack as one.
I have tried various ways of filtering the data to eliminate false-positives, and have been using neural networks to a limited degree of success to group cracks together. I understand there will be error, but as of now, there is just too much error. Does anyone have any insight for a non-AI expert as to the best way to accomplish my task or learn more about it? What kinds of books should I read, or what kind of classes should I take?
EDIT My question is more about how to notice patterns in my coworker's data and identify those patterns as actual cracks. It's the higher-level logic that I'm concerned with, not so much the low-level logic.
EDIT In all actuality, it would take AT LEAST 20 sample images to give an accurate representation of the data I'm working with. It varies a lot. But I do have a sample here, here, and here. These images have already been processed by my coworker's process. The red, blue, and green data is what I have to classify (red stands for dark crack, blue stands for light crack, and green stands for a wide/sealed crack).
In addition to the useful comments about image processing, it also sounds like you're dealing with a clustering problem.
Clustering algorithms come from the machine learning literature, specifically unsupervised learning. As the name implies, the basic idea is to try to identify natural clusters of data points within some large set of data.
For example, the picture below shows how a clustering algorithm might group a bunch of points into 7 clusters (indicated by circles and color):
(source: natekohl.net)
In your case, a clustering algorithm would attempt to repeatedly merge small cracks to form larger cracks, until some stopping criteria is met. The end result would be a smaller set of joined cracks. Of course, cracks are a little different than two-dimensional points -- part of the trick in getting a clustering algorithm to work here will be defining a useful distance metric between two cracks.
Popular clustering algorithms include k-means clustering (demo) and hierarchical clustering. That second link also has a nice step-by-step explanation of how k-means works.
EDIT: This paper by some engineers at Phillips looks relevant to what you're trying to do:
Chenn-Jung Huang, Chua-Chin Wang, Chi-Feng Wu, "Image Processing Techniques for Wafer Defect Cluster Identification," IEEE Design and Test of Computers, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 44-48, March/April, 2002.
They're doing a visual inspection for defects on silicon wafers, and use a median filter to remove noise before using a nearest-neighbor clustering algorithm to detect the defects.
Here are some related papers/books that they cite that might be useful:
M. Taubenlatt and J. Batchelder, “Patterned Wafer Inspection Using Spatial Filtering for Cluster Environment,” Applied Optics, vol. 31, no. 17, June 1992, pp. 3354-3362.
F.-L. Chen and S.-F. Liu, “A Neural-Network Approach to Recognize Defect Spatial Pattern in Semiconductor Fabrication.” IEEE Trans. Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 13, no. 3, Aug. 2000, pp. 366-373.
G. Earl, R. Johnsonbaugh, and S. Jost, Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1996.
Your problem falls in the very broad field of image classification. These types of problems can be notoriously difficult, and at the end of the day, solving them is an art. You must exploit every piece of knowledge you have about the problem domain to make it tractable.
One fundamental issue is normalization. You want to have similarly classified objects to be as similar as possible in their data representation. For example, if you have an image of the cracks, do all images have the same orientation? If not, then rotating the image may help in your classification. Similarly, scaling and translation (refer to this)
You also want to remove as much irrelevant data as possible from your training sets. Rather than directly working on the image, perhaps you could use edge extraction (for example Canny edge detection). This will remove all the 'noise' from the image, leaving only the edges. The exercise is then reduced to identifying which edges are the cracks and which are the natural pavement.
If you want to fast track to a solution then I suggest you first try the your luck with a Convolutional Neural Net, which can perform pretty good image classification with a minimum of preprocessing and noramlization. Its pretty well known in handwriting recognition, and might be just right for what you're doing.
I'm a bit confused by the way you've chosen to break down the problem. If your coworker isn't identifying complete cracks, and that's the spec, then that makes it your problem. But if you manage to stitch all the cracks together, and avoid his false positives, then haven't you just done his job?
That aside, I think this is an edge detection problem rather than a classification problem. If the edge detector is good, then your issues go away.
If you are still set on classification, then you are going to need a training set with known answers, since you need a way to quantify what differentiates a false positive from a real crack. However I still think it is unlikely that your classifier will be able to connect the cracks, since these are specific to each individual paving slab.
I have to agree with ire_and_curses, once you dive into the realm of edge detection to patch your co-developers crack detection, and remove his false positives, it seems as if you would be doing his job. If you can patch what his software did not detect, and remove his false positives around what he has given you. It seems like you would be able to do this for the full image.
If the spec is for him to detect the cracks, and you classify them, then it's his job to do the edge detection and remove false positives. And your job to take what he has given you and classify what type of crack it is. If you have to do edge detection to do that, then it sounds like you are not far from putting your co-developer out of work.
There are some very good answers here. But if you are unable to solve the problem, you may consider Mechanical Turk. In some cases it can be very cost-effective for stubborn problems. I know people who use it for all kinds of things like this (verification that a human can do easily but proves hard to code).
https://www.mturk.com/mturk/welcome
I am no expert by any means, but try looking at Haar Cascades. You may also wish to experiment with the OpenCV toolkit. These two things together do face detection and other object-detection tasks.
You may have to do "training" to develop a Haar Cascade for cracks in pavement.
What’s the best approach to recognize patterns in data, and what’s the best way to learn more on the topic?
The best approach is to study pattern recognition and machine learning. I would start with Duda's Pattern Classification and use Bishop's Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning as reference. It would take a good while for the material to sink in, but getting basic sense of pattern recognition and major approaches of classification problem should give you the direction. I can sit here and make some assumptions about your data, but honestly you probably have the best idea about the data set since you've been dealing with it more than anyone. Some of the useful technique for instance could be support vector machine and boosting.
Edit: An interesting application of boosting is real-time face detection. See Viola/Jones's Rapid Object Detection using a Boosted Cascade of Simple
Features (pdf). Also, looking at the sample images, I'd say you should try improving the edge detection a bit. Maybe smoothing the image with Gaussian and running more aggressive edge detection can increase detection of smaller cracks.
I suggest you pick up any image processing textbook and read on the subject.
Particularly, you might be interested in Morphological Operations like Dilation and Erosion, which complements the job of an edge detector. Plenty of materials on the net...
This is an image processing problem. There are lots of books written on the subject, and much of the material in these books will go beyond a line-detection problem like this. Here is the outline of one technique that would work for the problem.
When you find a crack, you find some pixels that make up the crack. Edge detection filters or other edge detection methods can be used for this.
Start with one (any) pixel in a crack, then "follow" it to make a multipoint line out of the crack -- save the points that make up the line. You can remove some intermediate points if they lie close to a straight line. Do this with all the crack pixels. If you have a star-shaped crack, don't worry about it. Just follow the pixels in one (or two) directions to make up a line, then remove these pixels from the set of crack pixels. The other legs of the star will recognized as separate lines (for now).
You might perform some thinning on the crack pixels before step 1. In other words, check the neighbors of the pixels, and if there are too many then ignore that pixel. (This is a simplification -- you can find several algorithms for this.) Another preprocessing step might be to remove all the lines that are too thin or two faint. This might help with the false positives.
Now you have a lot of short, multipoint lines. For the endpoints of each line, find the nearest line. If the lines are within a tolerance, then "connect" the lines -- link them or add them to the same structure or array. This way, you can connect the close cracks, which would likely be the same crack in the concrete.
It seems like no matter the algorithm, some parameter adjustment will be necessary for good performance. Write it so it's easy to make minor changes in things like intensity thresholds, minimum and maximum thickness, etc.
Depending on the usage environment, you might want to allow user judgement do determine the questionable cases, and/or allow a user to review the all the cracks and click to combine, split or remove detected cracks.
You got some very good answer, esp. #Nate's, and all the links and books suggested are worthwhile. However, I'm surprised nobody suggested the one book that would have been my top pick -- O'Reilly's Programming Collective Intelligence. The title may not seem germane to your question, but, believe me, the contents are: one of the most practical, programmer-oriented coverage of data mining and "machine learning" I've ever seen. Give it a spin!-)
It sounds a little like a problem there is in Rock Mechanics, where there are joints in a rock mass and these joints have to be grouped into 'sets' by orientation, length and other properties. In this instance one method that works well is clustering, although classical K-means does seem to have a few problems which I have addressed in the past using a genetic algorithm to run the interative solution.
In this instance I suspect it might not work quite the same way. In this case I suspect that you need to create your groups to start with i.e. longitudinal, transverse etc. and define exactly what the behviour of each group is i.e. can a single longitudinal crack branch part way along it's length, and if it does what does that do to it's classification.
Once you have that then for each crack, I would generate a random crack or pattern of cracks based on the classification you have created. You can then use something like a least squares approach to see how closely the crack you are checking fits against the random crack / cracks you have generated. You can repeat this analysis many times in the manner of a Monte-Carlo analysis to identify which of the randomly generated crack / cracks best fits the one you are checking.
To then deal with the false positives you will need to create a pattern for each of the different types of false positives i.e. the edge of a kerb is a straight line. You will then be able to run the analysis picking out which is the most likely group for each crack you analyse.
Finally, you will need to 'tweak' the definition of different crack types to try and get a better result. I guess this could either use an automated approach or a manual approach depending on how you define your different crack types.
One other modification that sometimes helps when I'm doing problems like this is to have a random group. By tweaking the sensitivity of a random group i.e. how more or less likely a crack is to be included in the random group, you can sometimes adjust the sensitivty of the model to complex patterns that don't really fit anywhere.
Good luck, looks to me like you have a real challenge.
You should read about data mining, specially pattern mining.
Data mining is the process of extracting patterns from data. As more data are gathered, with the amount of data doubling every three years, data mining is becoming an increasingly important tool to transform these data into information. It is commonly used in a wide range of profiling practices, such as marketing, surveillance, fraud detection and scientific discovery.
A good book on the subject is Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques
(source: waikato.ac.nz) ](http://www.amazon.com/Data-Mining-Ian-H-Witten/dp/3446215336 "ISBN 0-12-088407-0")
Basically what you have to do is apply statistical tools and methodologies to your datasets. The most used comparison methodologies are Student's t-test and the Chi squared test, to see if two unrelated variables are related with some confidence.