848 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMC-12, NO.

6, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1982

A Complete Set of Fourier Descriptors for

Two-Dimensional Shapes
THOMAS R. CRIMMINS

Astract-A set of Fourier descriptors for two-dimensional shapes is Note that a single point is not a object. Let -y and y2 be
defined which is complete in the sense that two objects have the same objects.
shape if and only if they have the same set of Fourier descriptors. It also is
shown that the moduli of the Fourier coefficients of the parameterizing Definition 2: The objects y, and y2 are equivalent, -yl = 72
function of the boundary of an object do not contain enough information to if there exist two complex numbers a and b such that
characterize the shape of an object. Further a relationship is established ,Y = ay2 + b.
between rotational symmetries of an object and the set of integers for Note that a m 0 since otherwise yl would consist of the
which the corresponding Fourier coefficients of the parameterizing func-
tion are nonzero. single point b, contradicting the assumption that it is an
object.
I. INTRODUCTION It is easy to see that = is an equivalence relation. That
is, if -yl, y2, and -y3 are objects, then
A COMPLETE SET of Fourier descriptors for two-
dimensional shapes is defined. This set is complete in a) -yl Yl (reflexivity)
the sense that two objects have the same shape if and only b) Y I Y22 m -Yl (symmetry)
if they have the same set of Fourier descriptors. The c) -y I Y2 and Y2 Y73 Y1 = -73 (transitivity).
objects will be in the complex plane and their boundaries Therefore the set of all objects can be partioned into
will be parameterized after the fashion of Granlund [1]. equivalence classes with respect to the equivalence relation
(See also Richard and Hemami [2].) Zahn and Roskies [3]
and Persoon and Fu [4] use a different but similar param- Definition 3: A shape is any equivalence class of objects
eterization. Granlund defines some Fourier descriptors with respect to the equivalence relation = .
which satisfy the condition that if two objects have the If S is a shape and -y E S then -y will be said to have the
same shape their corresponding Fourier descriptors are shape S.
equal. However, as he points out, equality of his Fourier
descriptors for two objects does not imply that the two III. PARAMETERIZATION
objects have the same shape. Thus his Fourier descriptors
do not truly characterize the shape of an object. The same Let -y be an object, let P be its perimeter, and let
comments apply to the Fourier descriptors defined by 27r
Zahn and Roskies. YN = Y
It also is shown that the moduli of the Fourier coeffi-
Then YN is an object with perimeter 2,r and YN Y. The
cients of the parameterizing function do not contain suffi-
cient information to characterize the shape of an object.object YN will be referred to as the normalization of -y.
Further, a relationship is established between rotational Now let C be the unit circle in C and let p be a point on
symmetries of the object and the supports of the FourierYN. A parameterizing function for yN, F: C -' YNN which
will also be referred to as a parameterizing function for -y,
transforms (functions on the integers, i.e., Fourier coeffi-
cients) of parameterizing functions for the object. will be defined in the following way. Let F(elo) be the
unique point on YN for which the arc length, measured in a
II. DEFINITIONS counterclockwise direction along YN from p to F(eiO), is O.
Then F is a continuous arc-length preserving one-to-one
The complex plane will be denoted by C. The following map of C onto YN. Note that F depends on the starting
definition identifies objects with their boundaries. point F(1) = Note also that if F is a
Definition 1: An object is a simple closed rectifiable function for -yp.and c is a strictly positive realparameterizing
number, then
Jordan curve in C. F is also a parameterizing function for cy.
Manuscript received January 21, 1982; revised May 20, 1982. This work IV. INSUFFICIENCY OF FOURIER MODULI
was supported by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency under
Contract F336 15-80-C-1 195 through the Avionics Laboratory at Air Let Yl and Y2 be objects and let F and G be parameteriz-
Force Wright Aeronautic Laboratories.
The author is with the Radar and Optics Division, Environmental ing functions for -yl and y2, respectively. The Fourier
Research Institute of Michigan, P.O. Box 8618, Ann Arbor, MI 48107. coefficients of F and G will be denoted by F(n) and G(n),
0018-9472/82/1100-0848$00.75 01982 IEEE
CRIMMINS: FOURIER DESCRIPTORS FOR 2-D SHAPES 849

ia
e 3 -e
ict 1
e

27r iaC
e 3 e ao ; 2

27r
iaV /-e 3
-e

-1 /ea
-e
e iac -e 3

f
Fig. 1. Y; 7 <at< 7

respectively, for n = 0, + 1, ± 2, . Then in the sense of

convergence in the L2 norm,
00

nZ (b)
Fig. 2.
and
00

G(z)= Gi(n)zn Example: A set of objects ya, will be defined which are
n==-oo not equivalent to each other, but for which the moduli of
the corresponding Fourier coefficients of their parameteriz-
for z E C. The following lemma is well-known [1], [2]. ing functions Fa are the same. This will be done by first
Lemma: y = y2 if and only if there exist real numbers a defining the derivatives fa of the parameterizing functions
and /3 such that with respect toO, where z = e'9.
F(n) = eei(a±nI3ki()
(+"G(n) Let c = g/6 and for g/3 < a < 2X/3 let
A

for all n * 0. (See Appendix for proof.) eia, for 0 < 0 < c
If w E C let W denote the complex conjugate of w. If -y is 1, for c < 0 < 2c
an object let eela
, for 2c < 0 < 3c
= (W: w E -y).
for 3c < 0 < 4c
Then y is also an object. Suppose F is a parameterizing elI.a for 4c < 0 < 5c
function for y. Then ,

e i27T/3 for 5c < 0 < 6c

F*(z) = F(z) , z e C, fM(eio) = eiai for 6c < 0 < 7c
is a parameterizing function for y. Also, -e1, for 7c < 0 < 8c
F*(n)= P(n),
for all n. i.a
ei, for 8c < 0 < 9c
Now suppose Yl and Y2 are objects with parameterizing ei f/3 for 9c < 0 < lOc
functions F and G, respectively. Suppose, further, that -e, ia
for lOc < 0 < llc
Yl Z Y2. Then by the lemma and the above discussion there _ i2,f/3
for llc < 0 < 12c.
exist real numbers and such thata

F(n) = ei(a±/n) G(n) for all n 0. A schematic representation Of fa is given in Fig. 1.

It can be shown (see Appendix) that Ifa(n)l is indepen-
,

Therefore by the lemma and the above, if either -yl Y2 or dent of a for all n. Now let
-y I Y2, then
Fi(e'0) = fOfa(eio) do
iF(n)l = (n)l, for alln 0.
The question now arises: does the reverse implication hold? and
That is, if IF(n)l = IG(n)I for all n # 0 does it follow that Ya=Fa(C).
either yl 72 or -y, y2? Unfortunately the answer is no, Then F. is continuous, and for (r/3) < a < (2 7/3) it is
as the following counterexample shows. one-to-one (see Fig. 2). Also since If,(z)l = 1 for all z
E C
850 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMC-12, NO. 6, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1982

it follows that F, is arc-length preserving. Furthermore for In the next section it will be shown that objects having
n * 0, rotational symmetry do not satisfy the condition that there
exists an integer no, such that -1 * no * 0 and c0 * 0 *
Fta(n) = 2l|Fj(e()e- in0d cn + I' Hence Theorem 1 is not applicable for objects
having rotational symmetry.

F27na(ee)e lo 2' VI. OBJECTS WITH ROTATIONAL SYMMETRY

f27a(eo )e in9dO
The theorem presented in this section gives a relation-
n ship between the rotational symmetries of an object and
Therefore the supports of the Fourier transforms of its parameteriz-
ing functions. Let -y be an object and let F be a para-
IFa(n)l= (n)I, for all n * 0, meterizing functioii for y.
Theorem 2: Let r be an integer greater than 1. Then
whence it follows that IF(n)l is independent of a for all y = ei2 /ryI
n * 0.
The objects -ya for two different values of a are shown in if and only if there exists an integer no such that
Figs. 2(a) and 2(b). They are clearly not equivalent, nor is F(n) 0 =O n = n0 (mod r)
one equivalent to the conjugate of the other.
and n 0 and r are relatively prime. (See Appendix for
V. A COMPLETE SET OF FOURIER DESCRIPTORS FOR proof.)
A RESTRICTED CLASS OF OBJECTS It is conjectured that the integer no in Theorem 2 can
always be taken to be 1. Granlund states that this is true
Let y, and Y2 be objects. Let F and G be parameterizing [1]. However his proof, while intuitively compelling, is not
functions for yl and Y2, respectively. For convenience of logically conclusive. See also the stronger conjecture in
notation let Section VIII.
cn =F(n), n = +1, +2,...
VII. THE MAIN THEOREM
and
The theorem presented in this section gives a complete
dn =G(n), n = 0, +1 ±2,*** set of Fourier descriptors for arbitrary objects. Let -yl and
Theorem 1: Suppose there exists an integer no such that m2 be objects and let F and G be parameterizing functions
-1* n0* 0 andcn, * O * Cn0 +. Then _y I Y2 if and for y, and Y2, respectively. Let
only if the following two conditions are satisfied: SI = {n: n *0 and F(n) 4:0)
a) ICno0
= Idnol and Icno+1I = Idno+11 and
b) cnno- = fnno-I nodn for all n t 0.
S2= (n: n 4 0 and G(n) n 0).
Furthermore if conditions a) and b) are satisfied, then Choose no0 E SI and let
F(z) = elaG(eiflz) + b D = (n - nO: n E SI).
and Let r be the greatest common divisor (gcd) of the in-
tegers in D, and let M be a minimal (with respect to set
P2
=pi
y2 + -b inclusion) subset of S, satisfying the condition that r is the
gcd of the integers in the set
where P1 and P2 are the perimeters of yl and Y2, respec-
{n - nO: n E M).
tively,
Then M is a finite set
it cnldno
{ni; j=1,*
d~
Cno n, M= J}.
cd

eia = i__ nO Also there exist integers pj, j = 1 J, such that

no
J
and E
j=I
pj(nj
-
no) = r.
b = F(O) e106(0). -

(See [5, p. 5].) For a method of computing such a sequence

As will be shown following the statement of Theorem 3, of integers see [5, p. 104].
Theorem 1 follows from Theorem 3 as a special case. For convenience of notation set
Expressions similar to those in condition b) are mentioned
in [1]. cn =F(n) and dn =G(n), n =
+1, +2,...
CRIMMINS: FOURIER DESCRIPTORS FOR 2-D SHAPES 851

Theorem 3: yI -y2 if and only if the following three APPENDIX

conditions are satisfied:
a) Icn,j = Id,1j, j = 0, 1,2, , J. Proof of the Lemma
Part I. yl 'y2 => there exists real a, /3 such that F(n) =
b) c(n -in)Irc(no-n)IrC(ni- no)r i(ae+np2)G
eS
'

Gin (n) for n *Y 0.

di(n-ni)lrd(no -1)nrd(nj-no)/r Since -y, 72, there exists a, b E= C such that
forj = 1, .., J, and for all n E Si. y = ay2 + b. (1)
c) SI = S2. Let P1 and P2 be the perimeters of y, and Y2, respectively.
Also let YNI and 'YN2 be the normalizations of -yl and y2,
Furthermore if these conditions are satisfied then respectively. Then
F(z) = eiaG(eI8z) + b, for z e C
and YNI=TPY2 and Y2=T Y2. (2)
From (1) and (2) it follows that
YI=Te y2 +y
p 2, 2 b
P2
YN = p aYN2 +
2vb
pb (3)
where P1 and P2 are the perimeters of y, and y2, respec- P1I
tively, e'A is any of the r rth roots of Since -YN1 and YN2 both have perimeter 27T it follows that
P2 =
p-a 1.
P1
j= I ( i10dnj
where (pj) is any sequence of J integers satisfying Let
J P2a
eia Pi (4)
E
j=1
p,(nj no) - = r,
and let
ein=a e- if3n0 H(z) = eiaG(z) + - b. (5)
pI
and From (3) and (4),
b = -()-eaG-(). YN1 = e YN2 + P b. (6)
See Appendix for proof. pi
Note that the exponents appearing in condition b) are all It follows from (5) and (6) that H is a parameterizing
integers, and hence there is no ambiguity involved in function for YNI. Therefore there exists a real number /B
raising complex numbers to these integral powers. such that
To see how Theorem 1 follows from Theorem 3, assume
the existence of an integer no such that - 1 . no * 0 and
F(1) = H(efl). (7)
Now it follows from (7) and the definition of parameteriz-
c,o *0*O CnO+. Thenr= I andMcan be taken as ing functions that
M= (no + 1).
F(z) = H(e fz), for all z E C,
Then J = 1, n = n 0 + 1, and p I = 1. Thus condition a) of
Theorem 1 is equivalent to condition a) of Theorem 3, and i.e.,
condition b) of Theorem 1 implies conditions b) and c) of
Theorem 3.
F(z) = eIOG(eIflz) + -i27fb for all z E C.

VIII. A CONJECTURE For n . 0 we have

2
Let F be a parameterizing function for an object y. The F(n) = l
2sr
F(e'o) e'0 d6
fact that F is a one-to-one function mapping the unit circle
onto y, plus the fact that the point F(z) moves around y in = eia lf2I G(e'(+))e--i "dO + f 2 e-iiO dO
a counterclockwise direction as z moves around the unit
circle in a counterclockwise direction, makes it seem very
likely that the following conjecture might be true. = eia l 2 G(els)e- in(4-i ) d4
Conjecture. If F is any parameterizing function for any
object, then eiaeiti7 1?TG (e) e- '110 d5
2

I(1)
inelJTG(n) e
O.

If this conjecture is true then the integer no in Theorems 2

= e

and 3 can be taken to be 1. This completes Part I of the proof.

852 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMC-12, NO. 6, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1982

Part II: F(n) = ei(a+n)G(n) for n * 0 :-yl 72. 0 -1

We have, in the sense of L2 convergence, 1
00
0
F(z) P(n )Zn
n= -oo o0
=
n*O
P(n)zn
F +F0)
-1 0
- i(a + (n) z n +FA)
n*O
0
= eia 6(n)(entz)n
G ± F(O) _--1
0
n*O 1
00
(a)
= ela G (n)(e"z )n +PAG) - elaGC(0)
nf -oo

= eiaG
G(ez) + F(o) - eiaG (0).
Therefore
YNI= eYN2 + F(O) - eaG(O). (8)
Now it follows from (2) and (8) that 0
I eia2 + 2 i [Ft(O) -
eaG(0)]
0 -e
In other words
yj = ay2 + b, -1 0
where 0
a = -e (b)
P2 Fig. 3.
and
b = 2[ F(0) - eLaG(0)].
In the sense of convergence in the L2 norm the function k
Therefore can be represented by
Y I 72
00
This completes the proof of the lemma. k(z) = E k(n )Zn.
n= -oo
Proof that tf,(n)l is independent of a for all n Also
Let
gl(z) z3k(z6)
=

{ eO/6, 0 s< < IT

h(e'0) - 00
vT < 0 < 27T. = Z3 E k( )6n
Next, let n==-oo

gl(z) = z3h(z6)3, for z E C

and
= fl 5£00 k (n )z
n = -ioo
(10)

g2(z) e-ist/6zh(-Z6)
= for z E C. On the other hand
The functions g, and g2 are represented schematically in 00
Figs. 3(a) and 3(b), respectively.
We have
g1(z) =

n-
E
0oo
g'(n)zn. (1 1)
fa(z) =
elagi(z) + g2(Z), for all z E C From (10) and (11) it follows that
and
for all n. (9) for m 3 and for all n
=

f (n) =
elagi(n) + g (n),
form 0,1,2,4,5
=

Now let and for all n.

k(z) = h(z)3, for z e C. (12)
CRIMMINS: FOURIER DESCRIPTORS FOR 2-D SHAPES 853

Next From (18) and (19) we obtain

00
g2(z) = e-i/6zh(
6
F(e(27r/r)pZ) e(27r/r)pnoZno
i £ F(nr + nO) ei2-7rpnznr
00
n= - oo
i 0/6
=e-e z E
n=
h(n)(-l )Z6n 00

noo
00
ei(21r1r)pnozno E Ft(nr + no)znr
fl -00
- £ (- 1)'e- i7/6h(n)z6n+l (13)
n = -coo - ei(2 7/r)(I qr)F(z)
-

Also = e (2v'r)F(z)) (20)

From (20) it follows that
g2(Z) = 9g2(n)zn. (14)
n =-oo YN=e-(2 /r)Y (21)
From (13) and (14) it follows that where yn is the normalization of y. Multiplying both sides
of (20) by P/2 T, where P is the perimeter of -y, yields
g2(6n + m) = for m = l and for all n. e-i(27/r)y
y=
Now assume
form = 0,2,3,4,5 and for all n.
y -e(2f/r)Y (22)
(15)
Let
Finally from (9), (12), and (15) it follows that
G(z) = ei(2,r/r)F(z).
I )Ae-ir/h(n), Then it follows from (22) that G is a parameterizing
for m = 1 and for all n. function for y. Therefore there exists a real number /3 such
Ja (6n + m) = ik(n), (16) that
for m = 3 and for all n. G(l) = F(e'O).
O,
for m = 0, 2, 4, 5 and for all n. Now it follows from the definition of parameterizing func-
tions that
It follows from (16) that
G (z) = F(e' zz), for all z E C,
h(n)1, for m = l and for all n. i.e.,
I (6n + m)I = Jk(n)j, for m = 3 and for all n. ei(27T/r)F(z) F(e-,Oz)
= z E C. (23)
0, form = 0,2,4,5
and for all n. By repeated use of (23) we obtain
Therefore Ifa( n)l is independent of a for all n. F(z) = F(elrPz), z E C. (24)
Since F is a one-to-one function it follows from (24) that
Proof of Theorem 2
First assume there exists no such that no and r are
ei r= I
relatively prime and Therefore there exists an integer p such that
t(n) 0 =n =

no (mod r). (17) r4 = 2,gp

or
Since no and r are relatively prime there exists integers p
and q such that (25)
r
pno + qr= 1. (18) Now it will be shown that p and r are relatively prime.
(See [5, p. 4].) Let s be the gcd of p and r. We wish to show that s 1. =

From (17) we obtain Let

P r
F(z) = P(n)z p,=- and r,=-.
n = - 00

Then
£ F(nr + nO)Z(nr+no) p =P (26)
n= - 00
r r

noon 00
By (23), (25), and (26),
z"o E F(nr + n0)z nr (19)
e i(2iT/r)F(z) F(ei(27T/rl)Plz ).
n =-oo
= (27)
854 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON SYSTEMS, MAN, AND CYBERNETICS, VOL. SMC-12, NO. 6, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1982

By repeated use of (27) we obtain Finally it follows from (29) that n0 and r are relatively
F(z) = F(ei2,,pIZ
prime. This completes the proof of Theorem 2.
= F(ei(t/l pIrIZ) Proof of Theorem 3
= ei(2ir/r)riFl(z) First assume Yi Z y2. Then by the lemma there exists
=-ei(2 lrls)F( 2 (28) real a. such that
Therefore c - ei(a+n)d for alln *0. (36)
e i(lff1s), It follows from (36) that
and hence ICnl = Idnl,
for all n * 0. (37)
s= 1
Conditions a) and c) now follow from (37). Further for
Therefore p and r are relatively prinne. It follows that there n e S and] = 1,* *, J
exist integers no and q, such that
nop + qr= 1 (29) n)/rj5nj-
Cno -j)/re(fo
By (23) and (25), - ei(a+nof)(n - nj)/rd(n -nj)/r

ei(27T/r)F(z) -F( i(21tr/r)pZ) (30) .ei(a+nji,)(no-n)/r

Also by (29), .d nj(no-n)/r . ei(a+nI?)(nj-no)/rd(nj-no)/r
n
ei(2-fr/r)pnO = ei(2or/r)(I-qr) =e-i(21 Vr)e- 2lrq= e i(21r/r) e h + nO
i(a/r)( -nj n+ nj no)
-

By the above and repeated use of (830), *e i(p/r)(on- nonj+ njno -njn + nn -nno)
7rlr)pnoZ )d(nn nj)/rd(no n)/rd(nj-no)/r
F(ei(2ir/r)z ) -F( i(2TT/r)pnoZ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~n - -
*
n

el(2wr/r, nF(z) OF(z).(31) = d(n nj)/rd(no-n)/rd(nj -no)/r

i
~~~~~~~no nj n
Since Thus condition b) is satisfied.
Now assume conditions a), b), and c) are satisfied. We
F(z)= E P( ")zn
00

n=-oo
want to show that yl y2.
Condition a) implies that
it follows that
00 #1 n (nj no
F(ei(2w/r)z) - E ( I
n= -oo
(32) ~~~~~~~j=1
dnjcno J
and and
00
e (2X/r)noF(z) = E P(n)e (2l/r)nozn. (33) dno
n = - oo

From (31), (32), and (33) we obtain Let e'i be any of the r r th roots of
00 00
£ f(n)e (27/r)nzn - (n)e(27/r)nozn (34)
n-- n=-oo rl1 dnjcno
It follows from (34) that and let
n ) e i(2-fr)n (n)ei(2,w/r)no for all n. = d
Therefore if for any particular value of n, F(n) * 0, it
follows that We have
e-(2-r/r)no
ei(2ir/r)n = J n -no (38)
This in turn implies that there exists an integer m such that r =1
j.1
-n = -no + 2irm. (35) Now let n E S,. By condition c) n e S2. Thus
$ 0 :* dn.
Cn *# n-
From (35) it follows that
n = no + mr Also, since
or n1E SI =S2, j= 0,l0,. J,
Cn * 0 ¢dn j 0,,I J.
n = no(modr). =
CRIMMINS: FOURIER DESCRIPTORS FOR 2-D SHAPES 855

Now, it follows from condition b) that Next,

00

c d n(nj-n0)/r C d (n - no)/r F(z)= n

dnen dnjeno
(39) n = -oo

= E CnZn + Co
n-O
Using (38) and (39) and the definition of ei' we obtain - ei(a+n)d zn + C0
n*O
cndn f d \ p1(ny-n0)/r = eia E dn(eiPz)n + co
dncno dncn o
00
= ema E dn(eipz)n + co-e'ado
nf -oo
J_I( dnCno eiaG(ei#z) + b,
e (40)
where
b = CO- eiado
JIj=( dncno) = F(O) - eiGc (0).
= cn( )P (n nO)/r p Let YNI and YN2 be the normalizations of yl and -y2,
1-1][( cn' dn ) (n,
i no)/r].
respectively. Then it follows from (40) that
= (li [( n )(f )/n]Pn
j= dn.noI YN,1 eiYN2 + b. (41)
Finally it follows from (41) that
Yi = p eiay2 + 2 b,
- eifr)(n
-no)r where Pi and P2 are the perimeters of ry and y2, respec-
i- (n-no) tively.
Therefore REFERENCES
Cen
c -e
no0
im8n o ,8fnd [1] G. H. Granlund, "Fourier preprocessing for hand print character
recognition," IEEE Trans. Comput., vol. C-21, no. 2, pp. 195-201,
Feb. 1972.
= ei(a+nP) d for all n E S1 = S2. [2] C. W. Richard, Jr. and H. Hemani, "Identification of three-dimen-
sional objects using Fourier descriptors of the boundary curve,"
IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., vol. SMC-4, no. 4, pp. 371-378,
On the other hand if n 0 SI = S2 and n * 0, then July 1974.
[3] C. T. Zahn and R. Z. Roskies, "Fourier descriptors for plane closed
Cn =O = dn curves," IEEE Trans. Comput., vol. C-31, no. 3, pp. 269-281, Mar.
1972.
Therefore, [4] E. Persoon and K. S. Fu, "Shape discrimination using Fourier
c = ei(a±+ n) d for alln 0. descriptors," IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., vol. SMC-7, pp.
170-179, Mar. 1977.
[5] I. Niven and H. S. Zuckerman, An Introduction to the Theory of
Now it follows from the Lemma that -y1 7Y2. Numbers. New York: Wiley, 1972.