Skip to main content

The Objective Evaluation of Image Object Segmentation Quality

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNIP,volume 8192))

Abstract

In this paper, a novel objective quality metric is proposed for individual object segmentation in images. We analyze four types of segmentation errors, and verify experimentally that besides quantity, area and contour, the distortion of object content is another useful segmentation quality index. Our metric evaluates the similarity between ideal result and segmentation result by measuring these distortions. The metric has been tested on our subjectively-rated image segmentation database and demonstrated a good performance in matching subjective ratings.

The original version of this chapter was revised: The copyright line was incorrect. This has been corrected. The Erratum to this chapter is available at DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-02895-8_64

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Powers, D.: Evaluation: From Precision, Recall and F-Factor to ROC, Informedne, Markedness & Correlation. Journal of Machine Learning Technologies 2(1), 37–63 (2011)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Ge, F., Wang, S., Liu, T.: New benchmark for image segmentation evaluation. Journal of Electronic Imaging 16(3), 33011 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Villegas, P., Marichal, X.: Perceptually-weighted evaluation criteria for segmentation masks in video sequences. IEEE Trans. Image Process 13(8), 1092–1103 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Erdem, C., Sankur, B.: Performance evaluation metrics for objectbased video segmentation. In: Proc. X Eur. Signal Process Conf., Tampere, Finland, vol. 2, pp. 917–920 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Strasters, K., Gebrands, J.: Three-dimensional image segmentation using a split, merge and group approach. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 12(5), 307–325 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. McGuinness, K., O’Connor, N.: A comparative evaluation of interactive segmentation algorithms. Pattern Recognition 43(2), 434–444 (2010)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Gelasca, E.D.: Full-reference objective quality metrics for video watermarking, video segmentation and 3D model watermarking. In: Ph.D. dissertation, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Correia, P., Pereira, F.: Objective evaluation of video segmentation quality. IEEE Trans. Image Process 12(2), 186–200 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhang, Y.J.: A Survey on Evaluation Methods for Image Segmentation. Pattern Recognition 29(8), 1335–1346 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Li, S., Mak, L.C.-M., Ngan, K.N.: Visual Quality Evaluation for Images and Videos. In: Lin, W., Tao, D., Kacprzyk, J., Li, Z., Izquierdo, E., Wang, H. (eds.) Multimedia Analysis, Processing and Communications. SCI, vol. 346, pp. 497–544. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Achanta, R., Hemami, S., Estrada, F., Susstrunk, S., Frequency-tuned, M.S.: salient region detection. In: Proc. IEEE CVPR, Miami, USA, pp. 1597–1604 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rahtu, E., Kannala, J., Salo, M., Heikkilä, J.: Segmenting salient objects from images and videos. In: Daniilidis, K., Maragos, P., Paragios, N. (eds.) ECCV 2010, Part V. LNCS, vol. 6315, pp. 366–379. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Internal Telecommunication Union Radio communication Sector, C.: ITU-R Recommendation BT.500-13, Methodology for the Subjective Assessment of the Quality of Television Pictures (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Video Quality Expert Group (VQEG) S.: Final Report From the Video Quality Experts Group on the Validation of Objective Models of Video Quality Assessment I (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Zadeh, L.: Fuzzy sets and systems. Information and Control 8(3), 338–353 (1965)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Li, S., Zhang, F., Ma, L., Ngan, K.N.: Image quality assessment by separately evaluating detail losses and additive impairments. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 13(5), 935–949 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Huynh-Thu, Q., Garcia, N.N., Speranza, F., Corriveau, P., Raake, A.: Study of rating scales for subjective quality assessment of high-definition video. IEEE Trans. Broadcasting 57(1), 1–14 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gelasca, E.D., Karaman, M., Ebrahimi, T., Sikora, T.: A Framework for Evaluating Video Object Segmentation Algorithms. In: Proc. IEEE CVPR Workshop, New York, USA, pp. 198–198 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Internal Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector, C.: ITU-T Recommendation P.910, Subjective video quality assessment methods for multimedia applications (2012)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Shi, R., Ngan, K.N., Li, S. (2013). The Objective Evaluation of Image Object Segmentation Quality. In: Blanc-Talon, J., Kasinski, A., Philips, W., Popescu, D., Scheunders, P. (eds) Advanced Concepts for Intelligent Vision Systems. ACIVS 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8192. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02895-8_42

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02895-8_42

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-02894-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-02895-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics