Comparison between immersion-based and toboggan-based watershed image segmentation

被引:57
作者
Lin, YC [1 ]
Tsai, YP
Hung, YP
Shih, ZC
机构
[1] Natl Taiwan Univ, Dept Comp Sci & Informat Engn, Taipei 10764, Taiwan
[2] Acad Sinica, Inst Informat Sci, Taipei, Taiwan
[3] Natl Chiao Tung Univ, Dept Comp & Informat Sci, Hsinchu 300, Taiwan
[4] Natl Taiwan Univ, Grad Inst Networking & Multimedia, Taipei 10764, Taiwan
关键词
immersion approach; order-invariance; toboggan approach; watershed image segmentation;
D O I
10.1109/TIP.2005.860996
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
Watershed segmentation has recently become a popular tool for image segmentation. There are two approaches to implementing watershed segmentation: immersion approach and toboggan simulation. Conceptually, the immersion approach can be viewed as an approach that starts from low altitude to high altitude and the toboggan approach as an approach that starts from high altitude to low altitude. The former seemed to be more popular recently (e.g., Vincent and Soille), but the latter had its own supporters (e.g., Mortensen and Barrett). It was not clear whether the two approaches could lead to exactly the same segmentation result and which approach was more efficient. In this paper, we present two "order-invariant" algorithms for watershed segmentation, one based on the immersion approach and the other on the toboggan approach. By introducing a special RIDGE label to achieve the property of order-invariance, we find that the two conceptually opposite approaches can indeed obtain the same segmentation result. When running on a Pentium-III PC, both of our algorithms require only less than 1130 s for a 256 x 256,image and 115 s for a 512 x 512 image, on average. What is more surprising is that the toboggan algorithm, which is less well known in the computer vision community, turns out to run faster than immersion algorithm for almost all the test images we have used, especially when the image is large, say, 512 x 512 or larger. This paper also gives some explanation as to Why the toboggan algorithm can be more efficient in most cases.
引用
收藏
页码:632 / 640
页数:9
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], P INT C PATT REC
[2]  
Beucher S., 1982, Proceedings of ICASSP 82. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, P1928
[3]   Topological grayscale watershed transformation [J].
Couprie, M ;
Bertrand, G .
VISION GEOMETRY VI, 1997, 3168 :136-146
[4]   Image segmentation and analysis via multiscale gradient watershed hierarchies [J].
Gauch, JM .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING, 1999, 8 (01) :69-79
[5]  
Ghosh S, 2000, P ANN INT IEEE EMBS, V22, P3174, DOI 10.1109/IEMBS.2000.901563
[6]   Watershed-based maximum-homogeneity filtering [J].
Hansen, MW ;
Higgins, WE .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING, 1999, 8 (07) :982-988
[7]   Hybrid image segmentation using watersheds and fast region merging [J].
Haris, K ;
Efstratiadis, SN ;
Maglaveras, N ;
Katsaggelos, AK .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON IMAGE PROCESSING, 1998, 7 (12) :1684-1699
[8]  
Moga A., 1995, P IEEE INT C IM PROC, V2, P101
[9]  
Mortensen E. N., 1999, Proceedings. 1999 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Cat. No PR00149), P452, DOI 10.1109/CVPR.1999.784720
[10]   Geodesic saliency of watershed contours and hierarchical segmentation [J].
Najman, L ;
Schmitt, M .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON PATTERN ANALYSIS AND MACHINE INTELLIGENCE, 1996, 18 (12) :1163-1173