Open Access
Issue
ITM Web Conf.
Volume 32, 2020
International Conference on Automation, Computing and Communication 2020 (ICACC-2020)
Article Number 03043
Number of page(s) 5
Section Computing
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/itmconf/20203203043
Published online 29 July 2020
  1. David G. Lowe. Object recognition from local scale-invariant features, In Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Corfu, Greece, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  2. Yu-Dae Ban, Jaeyeon Lee, Dae Hwan Hwang, Yun-Koo Chung. Face Image registration methods using Normalized Cross Correlation International Conference on Control. Automation and Systems, 2008, pp.2408-2411. [Google Scholar]
  3. David G. Lowe. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant key-points. International Journal of Computer Vision, 2004, (60), pp. 91-110. [Google Scholar]
  4. Yan Ke and R. Sukthankar. PCA-SIFT: a more distinctive representation for local image descriptors. In Proceedings IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 2004 July, 2(2), pp. 506-513. [Google Scholar]
  5. Danijela Ristic-Durrant Faraj Alhwarin, Chao Wang, and Axel Grser. Improved sift features matching for object recognition. BCS International Academic Conference 2008 Visions of Computer Science. 2008, pp. 179-190. [Google Scholar]
  6. Luo Juan and Oubong Gwon. A Comparison of SIFT, PCA-SIFT, and SURF. International Journal of Image Processing (IJIP). 2009, 3(4), pp. 143-152. [Google Scholar]
  7. Jignesh N Sarvaiya, Dr. Suprava Patnaik, Salman Bombaywala. Image registration using Log polar transform and phase correlation. IEEE Region 10 Conference TENCON. 2009, pp. 1-5. [Google Scholar]
  8. Hast, Anders. Robust and Invariant Phase Based Local Feature Matching. 22nd International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR). 2014, ISSN: 1051-4651, pp. 809-814. [Google Scholar]
  9. Wolberg G., Zokai S, Robust image registration using log-polar transform, In Proceeding International Conference on Image Processing, 2000 September, pp. 493-496. [Google Scholar]
  10. Y. Keller, A. Averbuch, M. Israeli. Pseudo polar-based estimation of large translations, rotations, and scalings in images. IEEE Trans. on Image processing. 2005, pp. 12-22. [Google Scholar]
  11. H. Liu, B. Guo, and Z. Feng. Pseudo-log-polar Fourier transforms for image registration. IEEE Transaction Signal Processing Letters. 2006 January, 13(1), pp. 1720. [Google Scholar]
  12. R. Matungka, Y.F. Zheng, and R.L. Ewing. 2D invariant object recognition using log-polar transform. In Proc. World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, 2008 January, pp. 223-228. [Google Scholar]
  13. A.N. Myrna, M.G. Venkateshmurthy, and C.G. Patil. Detection of region duplication forgery in digital images using wavelets and log-polar mapping. In Proc. Intl. Conf. Computational Intelligence and Multimedia Applications, 2007 December, (3), pp. 371-377. [Google Scholar]
  14. Xiaoxin Guo, Zhiwen Xu, Yinan Lu, and Yunjie Pang. An Application of Fourier-Mellin Transform in Image Registration. Proceedings of The Fifth International Conference on Computer and Information Technology, 2005, pp.619-623. [Google Scholar]
  15. B. Srinivasa Reddy and B.N. Chatterji. An FFT-Based Technique for Translation, Rotation, and Scale-Invariant Image Registration. IEEE Trans. on Image Processing. 1996, (5), pp.1266-1271. [Google Scholar]
  16. Xiaoxin Guo, Zhiwen Xu, Yinan Lu, and Yunjie Pang. An Application of Fourier-Mellin Transform in Image Registration. Proceedings of The Fifth International Conference on Computer and InformationTechnology, 2005, pp.619-623. [Google Scholar]
  17. Y. Keller, A. Averbuch, M. Israeli. Pseudo polar-based estimation of large translations, rotations, and scalings in the image. IEEE transaction on Image processing. 2005, pp. 12-22. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.