• Home
  • Search
  • A Comparative Analysis of Feature Extraction Algorithms for Augmented Reality Applications
  • Cite Icon4
  • https://doi.org/10.1109/icsima50015.2021.9526295Copy DOI Icon

A Comparative Analysis of Feature Extraction Algorithms for Augmented Reality Applications

  • Aug 23, 2021
  • Mir Suhail Alam +3 more
Show More
  • Abstract
  • Literature Map
  • References
  • Citations
  • Similar Papers
Abstract

The algorithms based on image feature detection and matching are critical in the field of computer vision. Feature extraction and matching algorithms are used in many computer vision problems, including object recognition and structure from motion. Each feature detector and descriptor algorithm’s computational efficiency and robust performance have a major impact on image matching precision and time utilization. The performance of image matching algorithms that use expensive descriptors for detection and matching is addressed using existing approaches. The algorithm’s efficiency is measured by the number of matches found and the number of faults discovered when evaluated against a given pair of images. It also depends on the algorithm that detects the features and matches them in less amount of time. This paper examines and compares the different algorithm (SURF, ORB, BRISK, FAST, KAZE, MINEIGEN, MSER) performances using distinct parameters such as affine transformation, blur, scale, illumination, and rotation. The Oxford dataset is used to assess their robustness and efficiency against the parameters of interest. The time taken to detect features, the time taken to match images, the number of identified feature points, and the total running time is recorded in this study. The quantitative results show that the ORB and SURF algorithms detect and match more features than other algorithms. Furthermore, they are computationally less expensive and robust compared to other algorithms. In addition, the robustness of ORB and SURF is quite high in terms of outliers, and the amount of time taken to match with the reference is also significantly less. However, the efficiency of SURF reduces against blur transformation. FAST is good in detecting corners but lacks efficiency under different transformations. Experiments show that when each algorithm is subjected to numerous alterations, it has its own set of advantages and limitations.

Similar Papers
  • Research Article
  • Citations4

Image feature extraction algorithm in big data environment

  • Jul 10, 2020
  • Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems
  • Yubao Zhang
  • Conference Article

Learning Low-Rank Images for Robust All-Day Feature Matching

  • Jun 01, 2019
  • Mengdan Feng +2
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations6

PPOIM: Privacy-Preserving Shape Context Based Image Denoising and Matching with Efficient Outsourcing

  • Jan 01, 2018
  • Meng Zheng +3
  • Conference Article
  • Citations1

English

  • Jan 01, 2006
  • Lai Chui Yen +2
  • Conference Article
  • Citations4

Image matching using GPT correlation associated with simplified HOG patterns

  • Nov 01, 2017
  • Shizhi Zhang +2
  • Conference Article

An Improved SIFT Algorithm for Image Matching

  • Jan 01, 2016
  • Hui Zhang +7
  • Conference Article
  • Citations11

Recognition of Banknotes in Multiple Perspectives Using Selective Feature Matching and Shape Analysis

  • May 01, 2016
  • Carlos M Costa +2
  • PDF
  • Conference Article
  • Citations2

Bringing Multimodality to Amazon Visual Search System

  • Aug 24, 2024
  • Xinliang Zhu +12
  • Research Article
  • Citations23

Image matching as a data source for forest inventory – Comparison of Semi-Global Matching and Next-Generation Automatic Terrain Extraction algorithms in a typical managed boreal forest environment

  • Apr 11, 2017
  • International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation
  • M Kukkonen +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations1

The generic combinatorial algorithm for image matching with classes of projective transformations

  • Mar 25, 2020
  • Information and Computation
  • Christian Rosenke +1
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations5

Application of Fuzzy Image Concept to Medical Images Matching

  • Jun 06, 2018
  • Piotr Zarychta
  • Research Article
  • Citations18

Endoscopic image feature matching via motion consensus and global bilateral regression

  • Jan 29, 2020
  • Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
  • Yakui Chu +8
  • Conference Article
  • Citations5

Randomized sub-vectors hashing for high-dimensional image feature matching

  • Oct 26, 2008
  • Heng Yang +2
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations3

Image Matching based on Curvilinear Regions

  • Jun 01, 2007
  • J Perez +4
  • Research Article
  • Citations16

Research on feature point extraction and matching machine learning method based on light field imaging

  • Jan 01, 2019
  • Neural Computing and Applications
  • Yue Wu
Cactus Communications logo

Copyright 2026 Cactus Communications. All rights reserved.