• DocumentCode
    1122511
  • Title

    Author´s Reply

  • Author

    Haralick, R.M.

  • Author_Institution
    Machine Vision International, Ann Arbor, MI 48104.
  • Issue
    1
  • fYear
    1985
  • Firstpage
    127
  • Lastpage
    129
  • Abstract
    We present evidence that the Laplacian zero-crossing operator does not use neighborhood information as effectively as the second directional derivative edge operator. We show that the use of a Gaussian smoother with standard deviation 5.0 for the Laplacian of a Gaussian edge operator with a neighborhood size of 50 × 50 both misses and misplaces edges on an aerial image of a mobile home park. Contrary to Grimson and Hildreth´s results, our results of the Laplacian edge detector on a noisy test checkerboard image are also not as good as the second directional derivative edge operator. We conclude by discussing a number of open issues on edge operator evaluation.
  • Keywords
    Computer errors; Detectors; Filters; Gaussian noise; Image edge detection; Laplace equations; Machine vision; Pixel; Smoothing methods; Testing;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Journal_Title
    Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, IEEE Transactions on
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • ISSN
    0162-8828
  • Type

    jour

  • DOI
    10.1109/TPAMI.1985.4767629
  • Filename
    4767629