Comparison between the morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition

Joseph M. Reinhardt, William Evan Higgins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition (MSD) are two popular approaches for morphological shape representation. Each method represents an object as an algebraic combination of a number of components, where each component is given by a locus of points dilated by a specified structuring-element homothetic. This correspondence develops a theoretical comparison between the two methods. Combining the theoretical results with several representation cost measures, we make a concrete comparison of the efficiency of the two methods. The results indicate that for complex objects-i.e., objects requiring a full range of homothetic sizes in the morphological skeleton representation-the MSD represents objects more efficiently than the morphological skeleton for three of four suggested cost measures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)951-957
Number of pages7
JournalIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Volume18
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1996

Fingerprint

Skeleton
Decomposition
Decompose
Costs
Concretes
Shape Representation
Number of Components
Locus
Correspondence
Object
Range of data

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Software
  • Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
  • Computational Theory and Mathematics
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Applied Mathematics

Cite this

@article{59d384498d2f4ff38852344ea264a22a,
title = "Comparison between the morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition",
abstract = "The morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition (MSD) are two popular approaches for morphological shape representation. Each method represents an object as an algebraic combination of a number of components, where each component is given by a locus of points dilated by a specified structuring-element homothetic. This correspondence develops a theoretical comparison between the two methods. Combining the theoretical results with several representation cost measures, we make a concrete comparison of the efficiency of the two methods. The results indicate that for complex objects-i.e., objects requiring a full range of homothetic sizes in the morphological skeleton representation-the MSD represents objects more efficiently than the morphological skeleton for three of four suggested cost measures.",
author = "Reinhardt, {Joseph M.} and Higgins, {William Evan}",
year = "1996",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1109/34.537351",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "951--957",
journal = "IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence",
issn = "0162-8828",
publisher = "IEEE Computer Society",
number = "9",

}

Comparison between the morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition. / Reinhardt, Joseph M.; Higgins, William Evan.

In: IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 18, No. 9, 01.01.1996, p. 951-957.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison between the morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition

AU - Reinhardt, Joseph M.

AU - Higgins, William Evan

PY - 1996/1/1

Y1 - 1996/1/1

N2 - The morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition (MSD) are two popular approaches for morphological shape representation. Each method represents an object as an algebraic combination of a number of components, where each component is given by a locus of points dilated by a specified structuring-element homothetic. This correspondence develops a theoretical comparison between the two methods. Combining the theoretical results with several representation cost measures, we make a concrete comparison of the efficiency of the two methods. The results indicate that for complex objects-i.e., objects requiring a full range of homothetic sizes in the morphological skeleton representation-the MSD represents objects more efficiently than the morphological skeleton for three of four suggested cost measures.

AB - The morphological skeleton and morphological shape decomposition (MSD) are two popular approaches for morphological shape representation. Each method represents an object as an algebraic combination of a number of components, where each component is given by a locus of points dilated by a specified structuring-element homothetic. This correspondence develops a theoretical comparison between the two methods. Combining the theoretical results with several representation cost measures, we make a concrete comparison of the efficiency of the two methods. The results indicate that for complex objects-i.e., objects requiring a full range of homothetic sizes in the morphological skeleton representation-the MSD represents objects more efficiently than the morphological skeleton for three of four suggested cost measures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030247802&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030247802&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1109/34.537351

DO - 10.1109/34.537351

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0030247802

VL - 18

SP - 951

EP - 957

JO - IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

JF - IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

SN - 0162-8828

IS - 9

ER -