Cargando…
Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects
This paper addresses the efficiency of two feature extraction methods for classifying small metal objects including screws, nuts, keys, and coins: the histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) and local binary pattern (LBP). The desired features for the labeled images are first extracted and saved in th...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Nature Singapore
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9085991/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35534747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42492-022-00111-6 |
_version_ | 1784703929981861888 |
---|---|
author | Amraee, Somaieh Chinipardaz, Maryam Charoosaei, Mohammadali |
author_facet | Amraee, Somaieh Chinipardaz, Maryam Charoosaei, Mohammadali |
author_sort | Amraee, Somaieh |
collection | PubMed |
description | This paper addresses the efficiency of two feature extraction methods for classifying small metal objects including screws, nuts, keys, and coins: the histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) and local binary pattern (LBP). The desired features for the labeled images are first extracted and saved in the form of a feature matrix. Using three different classification methods (non-parametric K-nearest neighbors algorithm, support vector machine, and naïve Bayesian method), the images are classified into four different classes. Then, by examining the resulting confusion matrix, the performances of the HOG and LBP approaches are compared for these four classes. The effectiveness of these two methods is also compared with the “You Only Look Once” and faster region-based convolutional neural network approaches, which are based on deep learning. The collected image set in this paper includes 800 labeled training images and 180 test images. The results show that the use of the HOG is more efficient than the use of the LBP. Moreover, a combination of the HOG and LBP provides better results than either alone. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9085991 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Nature Singapore |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90859912022-05-11 Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects Amraee, Somaieh Chinipardaz, Maryam Charoosaei, Mohammadali Vis Comput Ind Biomed Art Original Article This paper addresses the efficiency of two feature extraction methods for classifying small metal objects including screws, nuts, keys, and coins: the histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) and local binary pattern (LBP). The desired features for the labeled images are first extracted and saved in the form of a feature matrix. Using three different classification methods (non-parametric K-nearest neighbors algorithm, support vector machine, and naïve Bayesian method), the images are classified into four different classes. Then, by examining the resulting confusion matrix, the performances of the HOG and LBP approaches are compared for these four classes. The effectiveness of these two methods is also compared with the “You Only Look Once” and faster region-based convolutional neural network approaches, which are based on deep learning. The collected image set in this paper includes 800 labeled training images and 180 test images. The results show that the use of the HOG is more efficient than the use of the LBP. Moreover, a combination of the HOG and LBP provides better results than either alone. Springer Nature Singapore 2022-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9085991/ /pubmed/35534747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42492-022-00111-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Amraee, Somaieh Chinipardaz, Maryam Charoosaei, Mohammadali Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects |
title | Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects |
title_full | Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects |
title_fullStr | Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects |
title_full_unstemmed | Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects |
title_short | Analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects |
title_sort | analytical study of two feature extraction methods in comparison with deep learning methods for classification of small metal objects |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9085991/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35534747 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s42492-022-00111-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT amraeesomaieh analyticalstudyoftwofeatureextractionmethodsincomparisonwithdeeplearningmethodsforclassificationofsmallmetalobjects AT chinipardazmaryam analyticalstudyoftwofeatureextractionmethodsincomparisonwithdeeplearningmethodsforclassificationofsmallmetalobjects AT charoosaeimohammadali analyticalstudyoftwofeatureextractionmethodsincomparisonwithdeeplearningmethodsforclassificationofsmallmetalobjects |