Image Proc - Term Paper Report
Image Proc - Term Paper Report
Image Proc - Term Paper Report
a
a
TO
IIT, KANPUR
c c
d.Brief Introduction
2.Theory
u General K Means algorithm
u Previous Work
3.Approach
u Adaptation K Means
4.Discussion
u Simulation
u Our contribution
5.Conclusion
6.References
à
"
eyce ese
sc
yese
The main idea is to define ͞k͟ centroids, one for each cluster either
randomly or using a training set from the image itself. The next step
is to take each point belonging to a given data set and associate it to
the nearest centroid. When no point is pending, the first step is
completed and an early grouping is done. At this point we need to
re-calculate ͞k͟ new centroids as mean of the clusters resulting from
the previous step. After we have these ͞k͟ new centroids, a new
binding has to be done between the same data set points and the
nearest new centroid. A loop has been generated. As a result of this
loop we may notice that the k centroids change their location step by
step until no more changes are done. In other words centroids do
not move any more.
Finally, this algorithm aims at minimizing an ½
½, in this
case a squared error function. The objective function
#$
The algorithm was simulated for five standard images [3]. The
comparison is done among standard K-means[SKM], adaptation K ʹ
means [AKM] and the variance and median version of the proposed
AKM for the number of iteration of the respective algorithm. The
same is show as bar graph:-
25
20
d5 SKM
AKM
d0 VARIANCE_AKM
MEDIAN_AKM
5
0
TRUCK MOON FISH MULTIFISH BABY
%
G In addition to the proposed mean criteria we also tried the
proposed method with median and variance criteria. This is
done at the decision step 7) of the algorithm. Instead of
comparing the distance between the Ci and Ci+d with the
mean, we compared the same with the median and the
variance of the centres.
G As is visible in the graph the number of iterations in
Adaptation K-means, as proposed in the paper, are
significantly reduced over standard K- means. The same can
be said for the median and variance based variations of the
AKM as simulated by us but the results with them are never
better than the mean based version.
The method proposed in the paper is promising for a large collection
of images. It shows significant improvement over SKM as far as the
number of iterations required for the algorithm is concerned( which
in turn determines the speed of the algorithm, which is very
important for real-time applications). The median and variance
variations of the proposed AKM are also better than the SKM but
there is little difference in the number of iterations compared to
proposed AKM.