IMPROVING EDGE DETECTION BY AN OBJECTIVE EDGE
EVALUATION
Qiuming Zhu
Digital Imaging and Computer Vision Laboratory
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
University of Nebraska at Omaha
ABSTRACT
Edge detection is conventionally performed in an open-loop
system. No feedback from the outcome of the detection operation
is provided. The quality of the resulting edge image, thus, tends
to be uncontrollable. The performance of edge detection carI be
improved by conducting the operation in a closed-loop system.
This system performs an on-line objective edge evaluation. The
evaluation process computes a set of edge metrics for the resulting
image. An overall edge strength measurement of the image is
obtained. No a @on knowledge about the edge distributions in
the image is required for the measurement. Feedback of the
evaluation adjusts, or guides the adjustment of, the edge opaator
parameters, thus improving the quality of the resulting edge
images.
INTRODUCTION
Edge detection is a fundamental operation at the 10WSSlevel of
computer vision. Edge images ~ovide a concise and accurate
representation of object boundaries. From the detected edges
more complicated geometrical shapes and structures of the objects
can be identitled. Much research has beem devoted to the &sign
of good edge operators [z 4, 6, 9]. A numbex of such operators
based on morphological principles and functional attributes have
been developed [8, 11, 13, 15, 21]. These operators have been
applied to various images in an attempt to generate edge images
that fully reveal the originality of the edges for the objects
represented in the images.
Most edge detection operations are now performed in an open-
loop system. When the edge operator is applied to the image, no
feedback horn the output is provided to the operator. Such a
system’s structure is shown in Fig. 1.1. In this system, the quality
of the resulting edge images tends to be uncontrollable in real
time. As a resulg many edge images are cluttered with
Permission to copy without fee ell or part of this material ia
granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for
direot commercial advantage, the ACM copyright notica and the
title of the publication and its date appear, and notice is given
that copying is by permiaaion of the Association for Computing
Maohinery. To copy otherwiee, or to republish, requires a fee
andior apecitic permiaeion.
a 1992 ACM O-89791 -502-X/92 /000210459 . ..$l .50
459
discontinued edge segments and isolated edge points. This type
of edge image creates difficulty for the later stages of image
v~bg and image understanding.
We argue that it is sometimes necessary to apply feedback from
the outcome of the operator to the &tection process, so as to
improve the quality of the resulting edge image. This argument
is supported by the following observations:
(1) Different types of edges in the images require the use of
different edge operators. Images in red world
applications are very diverse. Edges in these images are
tailored to the structures of objects the images re~esent.
Previous efforts in edge detection reveal that an optimal
edge operator depends on how it fits the nature of edges
embedded in the image [4]. For example, on the one
han~ it is known that the Canny operator works well on
line edges, but it deteriorates on edge intersections [5].
On the other hand Marr’s L.aplscian of Gaussian (LOG)
operator works better on edge intersections, but fails on
noisy lines because of larger Iccation deviation than the
Canny’s operator. It is therefore often necessary to
select a proper edge operator for a specitlc image being
process~.
(2) Edges occur over a wide range of scales in the images.
It is known that edges with different widths and
orientations are presented in the original image with
different contrast levels [13]. Many edge operators are
defined with variant parameters (scales). For example,
the LOG operator is tailored to its standard deviation,
which determines the operation window size. An LOG
operator with a larger standard deviation works well on
edges with larger ramp but poorly for edges with
smaller ramps [12]. No edge operator with a single
scale can perform well on any edge images. Sometimes
in the edge detection, the problem is not only which
edge operator to apply, but also what parameters to use
for that operator. The effectiveness of an edge operator
is also related to the signal-noise ratio of the image. It
is often necessary to select a proper set of edge operator
 parameters(scales) to couple with the scale of the edges edge.
and the signal-noise ratio of the image. . “edge width” - an edge metrics that measures the
number of pixels occupied by the cross section of an
A feedbackis also neededin threaholdingand relaxation processes edge.
of edge extraction. When an on-line feedback is Proviti the
edge detection system performs an adaptive edge operation. The . “edge continuity” - an edge metrics that measures the
adaptation takes place in accordance with the outcome of the interruptiveness of the edge segments detected in an
operation. The system can select the edge operators or adjust the image.
operator parameters by evaluating the quality of the resulting edge . “edge a.mnectedness” - an edge metria that measures
images. A diagram of such a system structure is shown in how edges are comected with each other to form closed
Fig. x.2. boundaries of objects.
. “edge separableness” - an edge metrics that measures
The necessity of an on-line feedback for edge operation calls on
how an individual edge segment can be i&ntified fim
an objective evaluation of the resulting edge image. The objective
evaluation is required to provide guidance to the selection and other edges without confusion or mix up.
adjustment of the edge operator, or edge operator parametas, so
as to improve the qudky of edge detection. The application of In this paper, we will first discuss the evaluations of the edge
imag~ which are presented in section IL Section III deals with
the objective edge evaluation helps to determine the best value of
the edge strength meaaumment with rapect to the edge patteans
the threshold for threshouldingknhancement of the edge images.
In the edge relaxation process that follows edge detection, an in a local region. Edge metric measurement and an edge index
objective edge evaluation provides a means to determine the method for objective edge evaluation is presented in section IV.
termination condition of the iterative procdure. Section V illustrates the use of objective edge evaluations to
improve the performance of edge detection operations. Section IV
Most earlier work on edge image evaluation was done subjectively contains a concluding remark.
[1, 10,16,18, 19]. The pmxas involvm the use of some filcial
testing images, where the true edge locations are all known
beforehand. The main purpose of time evaluations is to rate the EDGE EVALUATIONS
edge operators. This method is unable to provide on-line feedback
to the detection processes. The problem discussed here requires It is known that there is a great deal of diversity in the
an objective edge evaluation being made on the real images. No requirements of edges extracted from images. It is also felt that
a priori knowledge about the edge distributions is known. We many applications share a common set of these requirements. For
present such an evaluation that makes use of a set of quantitative most image analysis processes that use edge information, it is
measurement of the edge metrics. The evaluation is done in real- required that
time.
(1) The edges present should be correct. That ia, edge
To facilitate the discussio~ we first specify the following terms points in the image must present actual (true) edges. If
that am to be used in the paper a pixel does not correspond to a true edge poin~ then it
should not be included in the edge point set. If the
pixel Caresponds to a true edge point then it should be
“true edge point” - a pixel that corresponds to an actual
detected as an edge point with a certain &gree of
edge point of an object in the image. strength.
“non+dge point” - a pixel that does not correspond to
any actual edge point of objects in the image. (2) Edges should be properly represented. A boundary
mo&l of objects requires that edges be extracted as
“detected edge point” - a pixel which is considered to be
continual lines that satisfy the following requirements:
an edge point by an edge detector. The pixel may be a
(i) Edges should be represented in a certain
true edge point or may be not.
width, not too thin and not too thick. It is
“strong edge point” - a pixel that possesses a high undesirable to have the edges with varying
probability value to be a true edge point after applying widths at different places in the image.
an edge &tedion operation. (ii) Edges should be in a certain degree of
“weak edge point” - a pixel that shows a low probability continuity. The set of edge points belonging
value to be a considered as a true edge point after to one edge segment should form a continuous
applying an edge &tection operation. line. The edge points should also be eaaily
formulated to a functional description of the
“thin edge point” - a pixel that is in an edge point set line.
where the members of this set form a thin (small width) (iii) Edges should have certain degree of
edge. connectivity. l%at i% one edge segment
“thick edge points” - a pixel that is in an edge point set should have connections with some other edge
where the members of this set forma thick (lsrge width) segments. These connections them form

460
 closed boundaries of the objects in the irnagea.
(iv) Edge segments should be separable from each
other. That is, no parallel edges should have
large amounts of pixels touching each other.
In other words, the intersection of the point
sets for two edge segments should be limited.
Previous edge image evaluation is mostly performed off-line and
subjedively. The methods make use of artificially synthesized
images with known signal-to-noise ratio or true edge depositions.
This type of approach allows a quantitative account of “true edge
points” and “non+dge points: as well as the “deductibility” and
“localization” [4] of the edges. However, for an objective edge
evaluation to be applied in a feedback the operation must be
conducted on real images in Eal time. The evaluation thus can
not rely on the use of artificial images. Moreover, the set of edge
metrics that can be measured by the on-line objective evaluation
is also different tkom the off-line, subjective evaluation. In the
following section, we fiist make an overview of these two
approaches.
A. Subjective Edge Evaluation
Among the early works of subjective edge evaluatio~ Pratt had
suggested an edge merit F to compare edge operators [18]. The
measurementis defined ax
where II is the number of ideal edge points, A 1A is t~ num~r
of actually detected edge points. The d(i) is the pixel-miss
distance of the ith edge detecte~ that is, the distance between an
edge point and the true edge point, The a is a scaling constant.
Abdou and Pratt [1 ] further evaluated a number of edge operators
in terms of the following statistical measurement (1) Edge
gradient amplitude response as a function of actual edge
orientation, (2) Detected edge orientation as a function of actual
edge orientation, (3) Edge gradient amplitude response as a
function of edge displacement (4) Probability of detection PD
versus probabiMy of false detection Pp (5) Pratt’s fig~ of mtit.
Some of these measures (such as 1 to 3) can be directly derived
from the mathematical representations of the operators. The
others are from the resulting edges of testing images.
Frarn and Deutsch [7] have based their evaluation of edge
operators on a standard form of edge image. It was chosen as a
binary plane in which a 1 &noted that the corresponding point
was considered an edge point and a O meant otherwise. They
measured two parameters: Pl, the ratio of the total number of
signal 1’s divided by the sum of the number of noise 1’s plus the
number of signsd l’s; P2, the fraction of remaining edge rows
“covered” by signal 1’s. The value provides a measure of the
distribution of the signal over the length of the edge. Shaw [19]
examined some edge &tectors by comparison of the resulting edge
images using as a measure the signal-to-noise ratio.
Peti and Malah’s [16] quantitative edge measurement also put the
461
edge image into a standard form, e.g., a O-1 binary image. They
have proposed 7 quantitative measures: (1) Percentage of edge
points detected on the i&al (&sired) edge+ (2) Number of detected
edge points which do not coincide with the ideal edge (normahzed
by the number of points on the edge), (3) Noise-to-signal ratio --
&fined as the ratio of the numkr of detected edge points, which
do not coincide with the ideal edg~ to the number of detected
edge pointa which coincide with the ideal edge (4) Mean width
of a detected edge -- defined as the ratio of the total number of
detected edge points to the number of ideal edge poink (5) Pratt’s
figure of mait measuremen~ denoted as RI, (6) Average WU~
deviation of a deteckd edge point form the i&fd edge
I*
=—
J%l
1A F-1 ez (i)
and (7) Mean abaohrte value of the deviation
where e is the distance between an edge point and the true edge
point. Haralick [10] employed three evaluation criteria for edge
evaluation. They are (1) conditional probabilities of assigned
edges given that they are true edgeq (2) conditional probabilities
of true edges given assigned edges; (3) error distance - the average
distance to the closest true edge pixels of pixels which are
assigned nonedge labels but which are tzue edge pixels.
In this paper, we do not intend to evaluate or compare edge
operators. We fcased on the objective evaluation of an edge
image itself rather than the operators. The measurement of a set
of quantitative edge metrics is emphasized.
B. Objective Edge Evaluation
Edge images in real world applications are very diverse. We have
to admit that some features of the edge images, such as the
de-lcdization of edge points and the percentage of &tected and
missing edge points, may not be measurable without using a
reference image. However, there are a number of edge features
that can be objectively measured. For example, edges in a binary
image should be distinguished fkom regions in terms of the width
and length. A thick edge mntairss a wi&ly eomected
homogeneous region, while a thin edge is marked by those edge
pixels that form a line. In Haralick’s perfect checkboard teat
image [10], true edges were defined to be two pixel wi& regions
in which each pixel neighbors some pixel having a value different
from it. Edge pints may be crow&d or sparse. One edge image
may contain many clustered edge poin@ the other may exhibit a
few isolated edges points. Edges have collinearitiea, inflections,
and CUSPS. Some imagea may contain many broken edge
segments. To control the quality of edge detectiom a quantitative
measurement of the above featurea of the resulting edge image is
needed This measurement should not & based on any teat
images. In this paper we will focus on the quantitative evaluation
Ofi
(1) edge wialh, which stands for how the edge points are
 concentrated to their true locations and thus forms thin edge pixel at the center of the window is connected to every pixel
linq in the window. l%e number of poaaible edge patterns for p3(n),
(2) edge corrrinuify, which measures how the edge points are &noted as #p.Jn), then is given by C(8, n-l), where n ia in a
adjacent with each other, therefore making it easy to range of from 1 to 9. In this ~ we have
derive and formulate a central line in the resulting
imagq *(1) = C(8,0)= 1, #pJ2) = C(8,1) = 8,
(3) edge ccwwcteohess, which indicates how edges are #p.J3) = C(8,2) = 28, #pJ4) = C(8,3) = 56,
connected with each othez to form closed loops that #pJ5) = C(8,4) = 70, #p.J6) = C(8,5) = 56,
corrqond to the boundary of objects; #p.J7) = C(8,6) = 28, #pJ8) = C(8,7) = 8,
(4) edge mparabkmess, that is, each edge line should be #pJ9) = C(8,8) = 1.
identifiable, not coinci&nt with any other edge, or in
parallel touch with each other. The total number of edge pattexns is 256. In the edge strength
computation for the imag~ we then have to first i&ntify the
We evaluate the edge image by an objective edge strength pattern among the 2S6 possibilities for each edge point. The
measurement ‘he evaluation is baaed on the following strcqgths fmm all these patterns have to be summed and
observations: An edge is generally a local feature of an image. lt normalized.
is observed that the probability of a particular pixel being an edge
pixel is only a function of the neighboring pixels, not the entire A simpler and more effective approach ia adopted in our system.
image. Edge pointa can be formulated in terms of edge patterns Instead of identi@ng the exact edge pattezns for the edge points,
in their neighborhood region. Each pattern represents a certain we only identi~ the edge pattern group for each edge point.
degree of strength of the edge point in the image. Most edge These groups can be easily identified by counting the number of
properties can be measured in terms of the statistics of this edge edge pixels in the d by d window. For d = 3, only nine groups
strength. need to be conaidereQ then, instead of 2S6 patterns. We assign
edge strength to each of the pattern groups by a timction s@d(n)).
@d(n)) is in a range of from O to 1. The total strength of the
EDGE PATTERNING pattern group pal(n) is calculated by

Edge images are conventionallyrepresented in binary forma. A

pixel valued 1 represents a true edge point and a pixel valued O
represents a non-edge point in the image. The continuity of edge s(p~(n)) = i
points must be defined in either 4-connection or 8-comection
mode in its neighborhood In a 4-comection, only the upper,
TP: (n)

bottom, ngh~ and left neighbora of the edge pixel are considered
to be connected. In an 8umnection, neighboring pixela in all
eight geographical dwections are considered to be comectcd.
Examples of 4-umnected and 8-ccmnected edges are shown in
~lg.~].l. h this paper, an 8-connection is assumed.
The characteristics of edge pixels can be described in patterns
formed by the pixels in a dxd (d > 3) region of ita neighborhood.
We call such a region a d by d window. Many edge pmpertiea
are exhibkd in the patterns of this win&w. Let pal(n) denote the
patterns that are formed by n edge pixels in a &d window. So
pal(n) r~r~enk a group of patterns. For example, the pattCmS in
Fig. HI. 3 are edge patterns in group of %(2).
An edge strength measurement can be Mined on each of these
patterna. The edge strength takes a valu in the range of from O
to 1. Given a set of edge quality crib if an edge pattern
satisfies all the criteri~ it is assigned an edge strength value 1. If
the pattern doa not quali@ for an edge pattern at ~ it is
assigned O. We can compub the edge strengthof an image fium
the strength measurement of the patterns at the edge points.
However, this approach tenda to be very computationally
intensive, and therefore, time-cm suming. For example, look at
the windows with width d =3, that is, the edge patterns in a 3x3
neighborhood. In the edge evaluation, we placed the edge pixel
evaluated at the center of the window. With an 8-connectio~ the
where s(pdi(n)) stands for the strength value of the ith pa- in
the pal(n) pup. ~ edge s~ngth over an image is then
calculated baaed on the strength measures of the edge pattern
groups and the number of edges in each of the edge pattern
groups.
To evaluate edge aken~ a set of criteria is needed. We adopt
the definition that edges are continual and comected thin lines in
a binary image. By statistically studying a number of edge images
that contain man-made objects and natural scenes, an ideal edge
image is defined as following in our discussion
(1) Edge width w = 1. This means that in general only one
pixel is seen at the cross section of an edge line. This
assumption does not exclu& those cases where more
than one pixel is seen at the turning or intemecting
pointa of the edges.
(2) Minimum edge segment length k = 2 This means that
every edge segment should be formed by at least 2 edge
pixels. Note that this condition does not imply that any
pair of two edge pixels is a valid edge segment.
(3) Rate of edge comectivity es = 0.9. This means that
over 90 pemnt of the edge segments must be comected
with some other edge segment. In other worb only 10
percent of the terminating edge segments are expected

462
 to be seen in the image. of these patterns has an edge streagth O. The edge
(4) Degree of edge aepamtion, da = 1, i.e., at lest one pixel patterns generated by others represent turning points or
is needed to separate any two parallel edge segments. intersections of edges. They are all valid in our
discussion. The overall edge strength for %(4) patterns,
We use the above conditions as our criteria for objective edge s@(4)J then equals to
quality evaluation. Undcz these criteri~ the edge strength for each
pattern group in ~(n) edge patterns is obtained in the following (8* 0.0 +48 ● 1,0)/56= (386
way:
We call the edge pixel that is classified in the %(4)
(1) n = 1. Only one pattern exists in this X as it is pattern a strong edge point too.
shown in Fig. III. 2. It is obvious that the p~(l) pattern
represents isolated edge @nts. We say ~(l) is a non- (5) n = 5. Thexe are a total of 70 psttems in the ~(5). The
edge point. It is probably the noise point in real edge patterns are represented by the primary forms in Fig.
images. This pattern does not satisfy any of the above IIL6, where the form in (g) repaents four possible
edge cziteria. The totrd strength of this pattern group, patterns and the form in (j) only represents two patterns.
s~(l)), is equal to O. The mat each of them represents eight patterns. The
validates of the patterns are listed in following:
(2) n = 2. There are total of eight patterns in this group, as
shown in Fig. IIL3. Each of these eight %(2) patterns (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) @
represents a 2-pixel segment of an edge. The pattern # patterns 8 88 8 8 84 8 8 2
reflects a termination of that edge. The terminating # valid 0444884882
point is the center pixel. Some of these segments may #invalid 84440000 00
be parts of continual edges, some maybe broken edges
consisting of only two pixels. The existence of %(2) Note that forms (b), (c), and (d) contain both valid and
patterns indicates a certain degree of diaconnectivity of invalid patterns. Fig. III. 6 shows the valid cases for the
the edges in the image. The edge strength of each of (b), (c) and (d). The invdld forms are shown in Fig.
these patterns is O. The total strength of this pattern III. 7, where the patterns are still labelled as (b), (c), and
gmutl $fpd(2)). th~, is b Wd tO O. (d). The valid patterns represent possible turning and
intersection points of edges. Surnmariziig the above
(3) n. 3. There are a total of 28 patterns in the~(3). The coun~ we have the edge s@ength value for the p3(5)
patterns are shown in Fig. 111.4. The figure only shows patterns. ~pd(5)), Wti to
four primary forms of the possible p3(3) patterns, where
(a), (b), and (c) re~eaent eight possible patterns and (d) (20 * 0.0+50* 1.0) /70= 0.71
represents four possible patterns. To generate those
patterns, we simply rotate the edge pixels that are off We call the edge pixel that is classified in the %(5)
the center of the window in the primary forms. In the pattern a strong edge point.
Fig. 111.4 (a), all the eight possible patterns are parts of
some terminating edges. In these cases, the edge (6) n. 6. There area total of 56 patterns in the p3(6). The
strength of the pattern is assigned zero. The rest 20 patterns are represented by the primary forms in Fig.
p3(3) ps@-rns satis~ the four edge Critexiq thereforq 111.8,where eaeh form represents eight possible patterns
each of them has a strength value of L Some of these by rotating the pixels around the center. The validity of
edge patterns may represent strsight line edges. Some the patterns can be derived in the seine way as the
of them may represent turning points of the edges. The above cases. The number of valid patterns in each form
total strength of this pattern group, s@(3)), is calculated is listed in the following
by
(a) (%) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g)
(8 ● 0.0 +20* 1.0)/28= 0.71 # p-S 8 888888
# valid 0004448
We call the edge pixel that is classified in the M(3) #invalid 8884440
pattern a stxong edge point.
The overall edge strength for M(6) pattem~ S(pd(6)), is
(4) n =4. There are a total of 56 patterns in the %(4). The then qual to
patterns are represented by the primary forms in Fig.
111.5,whereeachformrepresentseightpossiblepatterns (36 * 0.0+20* 1.0)/56= 0.36
by rotating the puels around the center. We found that
only the eight patterns that can be generated by the form We call the edge pixel that is classified in the %(6)
in (a) are of doubtful validity. They either violate the pattern a weak edge point.
criteria one (the width) or three (the comectivity). Each

463
(7) n=7. There areatotalof28 pattemsinthep.@. The pattern gmupa, i.e., counting the #p@). This can be done by
patterns are shown in Fig. 111.9, where (ai (b), and (c)
represent eight possl%le patterns and (d) ~entx four for d X and y, if (~(z y)= n) theJl fi~(n) = tid(n) +
possible patterns. Only two patterns caning ikom (d) 1;
are valid edges. These edges form an “H” shape edge
pattern. The edge strength of this pattern group, where the values of x and y cover the entire ran8e of pixels in the
S@d(’7))tis image. A histogram of the number of edge patterns is then
formed by the above operation. We call it the edge in&x
(26* 0.0+2 ● 1.0) /28= 0.07 histogram, denoted as h~). Every edge image has a unique edge
index histogram. Some examples of the histogram and their
We call the edge pixel that is classified in the M(7) corresponding edge images are shown in Fig. IV.1.
pattern a weak edge point.
A number of quantitative measurem ent of the edge image quality
(8) n = 8. Eight patterns am contained in this group as can be obtained &cm the edge index histogram. It is noted that
shown Fig. RI.1O. It is easy to see that all these eight the amount of isolated edge poinq which are probably caoaed by
patterns are invalid because of the violation of criterion image noisea, arerevealed in the pattern groups of ~(l) andp3(2).
one. The total strength of this pattern group, s@(8)J is We cm calculate the ratio for the amount of pixels in these
equal to O. Pixels in p3(8) pattern are non+ige points. pattern groups with respect to the total edge points in the image,
that is
.. ..
(9) n=9. ‘Iheordy pattern inthisgroup isshownin Fig.
111.11. This pattern is obviously not a valid edge
pattern. The edge strength of this pattern group,
~h(r.)”(1-;~(r.)))
x.-l
fid(9)). is equrd to 0. pixeh in p3(9) p-m = non-
R 1s01 =
~h(IJ “
edge points. I.

Generally, edge patterns beyond %(4) contain turning poin@

cusps, intersedio~ or a collinear of edge segments. The patterns For the amount of thick and smeared edge segments in the image,
beyond P3(6) indicate the existence of blurred regions in the we can look at the ratio of the pixels in pattern gIUUpS P3(5),
image. When edges are defined with a width w greater thm one P3(6)> P3(7)> P3(8), ad %(9) with r~@ to the to~ number of
as we have considered above, a larger window size may need to edge pixels. R is calculated by
be used in the edge strength measurement The edge strength for
thepatterns with a larger window size need to be re-calculated.
~ h(q) “ (1 - s(p~(Ie)))
Sometimes, we can combine the edge strength measurements in Ie=s
two or more different window sizes. R thick =
~h(IJ
I*

EDGE IMAGE QUANTIZATION

The ratio
Let f(x, y) be an image function in binary representation, f(x, y)
= 1 if (x, y) is an edge pixel, otherwise f(x, y)= O. The pattern
group to which an edge pixel belongs can be identified by simply
counting the number of edge pixels in a given window. We use
a variable called an edge index, demMed as ~, to represent such
a pattern group to which an edge pixel is classified. For an edge
pixel (x, y), the edge index is calculated by:
can be used to describe how the edges are formed in continual and
Ia (X, @ = f(x+f, y+j) connected contour lines in the image.
TF
The ovexall strength of an edge image is measured by
where ~ j = -~ -d+l, ....0,..., d-1, ~ and f(x, y) is an edge point.
For edge patterns that are formed in a whubw of d = 3, it is
obvious that Ie is in a range of from 1 to 9. The ~ is equivalent
to the pattern number n we used in the last section,

In principle, the statistics of I, can be used to represent the

strength of edges over the image. If the edges are well-fomwd in Edge images with different ~a values are shown in Fig. XV.2.
an edge imag~ then the ~ will show a value in a certain range.
We first compute the number of edge pixels in each of those edge The above measurements can be further generalized. We
normalize the edge index hwtogrsm by

464
 While the objective edge strength measurements mentioned above
are independent of edge operations, the improvement of edge
imagesmay be tailored to specificedge detectors. It is commonly
agreedthat edge&tection is esaeatiallya differentiation operation.
The operatm are ckwsihd into two classea: 1) first order
derivative operators and 2) second or&r derivative operators [20].
The H(Q can be viewed as a probability distribution of edge In the first-order derivative o~ation, edges are detected aa a local
indices,whichreflect the edge strengthsin the images. A number maxima of the convolution of the image with a first derivative
of statistic measurements of an edge image can be derived from opmator. The operator is usually referred to as a grdient operator
this distribution because it measurea the gradients of the intensity changes of the
2D image titian in local area. A threaholding opaation is
1. MM of the edge index distribution usually required to bring the resulting image to binary fmm the
fnt order derivative operation [3,4, 12.j 14]. In the scxmnd+rder
IA(H) = ~ H(I.) ● 1.. derivative operation, edges are detected as the ZRXOcrossings of
1, the convolution for the image with a second order derivative
operator. Edge images resulting horn these operators are more
2. Variance of the edge index distribution sensitive to the scales of the operatora. In this Sedio% we discuss
the use of the objective edge evaluation to enhance and impmve
u(H) =~H(IJ “ (1, - P(H))’. the edge images resulting from these operations.
Ie

V.I. Adjusfing Operator Scales

3, Maximum of edge index distribution Ithaa been shown that edges generated by an operator with a
better selected parameter outperforms the edges that have
MAX(H) = ~ if H(n) is the maximum of the H~s. undergohe a number of relaxation processes which are baaed on
the use of an operator with an ill-selected parameter [5, 14].
We consider an idea edge image. It is defined as an edge image Objective edge evaluation is critical to the pmctss of selecting a
that has the overall edge strength ~d maximized. We call the properedge operatorscale for a given image. We appliedthe
edge index value that maximizes the ~~ the deaiied edge index, statisticalmeasurements of the edge index to cmtrol the edge
denoted as ~e. For edge patterns with a window sized = 3, we images resulted horn an LOG operator. The operator scale u is
see that the maximization uires h(~ = O for all ~s that are not adjusted according to the objective evaluation of resulting edge
equal to 4. Therefore, the? ~ value should be very close to 4 in image. We have used the p(I-Q - r. to guidetheadjustment of
our discussion. A nesdy ideal edge image and its edge strength the LOG scale U. Generally, when P(HJ - I“e > c, the u is
histogram are shown in Fig. IV.3. With the use of the desired decrease4 where c is a small positive value. When r, - P(I$)>
edge index, the following measurementsof an edge image can c, the a is increased.Fig. V.1 shows different edge images
also be made obtained by changing the operator scales when b edge
meSSUre.Ment H(pd(n)) iS obtained The figure ShOWSboth the
4. Distance of mean of edge index from the desired value edge imagea and the related p(I-Q valuea.

DIST(I.I(H),I“e ) = ip(H) - I*,I V.2. Sekting Threshokiing Values

The purpose of a thresholding opesation is to exclude false (small
5. Distance of maximum edge index horn the desired value gradient magnitude) edge responses and to enhance true (high
gra&ent magnitude) edge reqonsea aftez a fti+rder
DIST(M(H),I“e)= IM(I-1)- I*J differentiation operation. The main problem in edge thresholding
is how to choose a proper threshold value so that a better edge
6. Deviation of the edge index distribution from the desired image can be obtained. The selection of the beat threshold value
value is usually a disturbing problem because there is insufficient
knowledge about the nature of edges in the image.
m’v(I@, 1;) = ~ H(IJ ● (1, - 1:)’.
1. Edge thresholdmg is a global operation. It is desirable to have a
global measurement of the edge strength for the selection of the
best thresholding value. We have used the overall edge strength
Either the overall edge strength measurement ~ti or the above measuraneng ~ti, to guide the =Iection and adjustment of the
statistical measurements of an edge image can be used in a threshold values. Let T be a threshold variable and TObe the
feedback process for edge operation improvement. This process initial value. The adjustmentof T is conducted by the following
is described in next section. function:

EDGE IMPROVEMENTS
where ~ is a constant factor. The process iterates until there is

465
no signitkant different between the two successive images. Fig.
V.2 shows four successively processed edge images in the
thresholding procew. The total edge strength value for each of the
images is indicated in the captions of the figure.
CONCLUSION
Edges often correspond to the bounding contours of ob~ as
they appear in the image. These contour lines provide important
3D structural information of the objects. In most cases, edges do
not appear as coherent events in the image and must be
reconstructed from fkgments obtained from low level processing.
Good edge detection requires that the operator be designed to fit
the nature of a spec~]c image. me ddgn and application includes
the choice of falters with different size end function parameters.
The open-loop system approach used in cumnt edge detection
processes usually does not guarantee the quality of the resulting
edge images. A system with feedback horn the outcome of the
operation provides an alternative approach for im~oving the edge
detection operations. However, the approach requires the use of
an objective edge image evaluation scheme.
Common criteria relevant to edge detector performance am (1)
low error rate, that is, edges that occur in the image should not be
missed (2) localization, that is, the distance between the points
marked by the &tector and the “center” of the tme edge should be
minimized; (3) certain &gr- of width, continuity, connectedness,
and separateness of the resulting edge segments. The use of
artificial testing images can evaluate the error rate and localhtion
effectively. However, the method is not applicable in a real-time
edge detection process. The objective evaluation method
presented in this paper allows an adaptive approach for the
improvement of edge detection operations. This system allows
one to select a best operator or a best set of parameters of an
operator for a s@fic image in real time. When the selection of
edge operators or edge operator pararnetem better fits the nature
of the edge images, pixels near the true edge points are most
likely being recognized.
REFERENCES
[1] Abdou I. E. and Prst$ W. K., “Quantitative Design end
Evaluation of Enhancement ‘l%resholding Edge
Detectors,” Prmeedings of IEEE,Vol. 67, No. 5, May
1979, pp. 753-763.
[2] Brook, M.J., ‘!ltationaliziig Edge Detector%”Computer
Graphics and Image Processing, Vol. 8, 1978, pp. 277-
285.
[3] Bergho@ F,, “Edge Focusing,” IEEE Trans. on Pattern
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI-9 (1987), pp.
726-741.
[4] Canny, J., “A Computational Approach to Edge
DetectioL” IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and
Machine Intelligence, PAMI-8 (1986), pp. 679-698.
[5] Chem J. S. and MedioN, G. “Detection, Localization,
and Estimation of Bdgea,” IEEE Trans. on Pattern
466
Anatysis and Machine Intelligence, Vol. 11, No. % Feb.
1989, pp. 191-199.
[6] Davis, L.S., “A Survey of Edge Detection Techniques,”
Computer Graphics and Image Processing, Vol. 4, No.
3, 1975, pp. 248-270.
[m Fram, J1. and Deutsch, E. W., “On the Quantitative
Evaluation of Edge Detection Schemes and their
Comparison with Human Performance,” IEEE Tram.
Canywter, Vol. C-24, June 1975, pp. 616428.
[8] Frei, W. and Chen, C. C., “Fast Boundary Detection A
Genedization and New Algorithm,” IEEE Transaction.r
on Computers, Vol. C-26, No. 10, OCL 1977, pp. 988-
998.
[9] Grimsou W. E. L. and Hildreth, E. C., “Comments on
‘Digital Step Edges ffom Zezo Crossings of Second
Directional Derivatives,” IEEE Trans. on Pattern
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMf-7, Jan. 1985,
pp. 121-129.
[10] Harslic~ R. M., “Digital Step Edges from 22x-ocrossing
of Second Directional Derivative%” IEEE Trans. on
Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI-6
(1984), pp. 58-68.
[11] Kundw A. and Miti~ S. K., “A New Algorithm for
Image Edge Extraction Using a Statistical Classifier
Approach,” IEEE Tam. on Pattern Anaiysis and
Machine Intelligence, PAMI-9, No. 4, July 1987, pp.
569-5n.
[12] Lu, Y. and J@ R. C., “Behavior of Edges in Scale
Space,” IEEE Tram. on Pattern Analysis and machine
Intelligence, Vol. 11, No. 4, April 1989, pp. 337-356.
[13] Msrr, D. C. and Hildreth, E. C., “’l%emy of Edge
Detection,” Proceedings of theRoyal Society qfl.ondon,
B207, 198Q pp. 187-217.
[14] MitcheL E. D% Caprile, B., Ottonello, P., and Tone,
V., “Localization and Noise in Edge Det@io~” IEEE
Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,
PAML1l (1989), pp. 1106-1116.
[15] Nalw% V.S. and Binfo~ T. O., “On Detecting Edges,”
IEEE Trans. on Pattern Analysis and Machine
Intelligence, PAMI-8 (1986), pp. 699-714.
[16] Peli, T. and Ma@ D., “A Study of Edge Detection
Algorithm%” Computer Graphics Image Processing, VOL
20, 1982 pp. 1-21.
[17] Prsger, J. M., ‘Extracting and Labeling Boundary
Segments in Natural Scenes,” IEEE Trans. on Pat~em
Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI-Z No. 1,
Januay 198~ Pp. 16-27.
[18] Prsw W. K., Digital Image Prcwessing, W~-
Interscien% New York 1978.
[19] Shaw, G. B., ‘local and Regional Edge Detectors: Some
Comparisons,” Computer Graphics and Image
Prmessing, VOL 9, 1979, pp. 135-149.
[20] Tome, V. andPoggio, T. A., “OnEdge Detectio%” IEEE
Tram. on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,
PAMI-8, No. 2, March 1986, pp. 147-163.
[21] ~U, Q., Hung, Y. Y., Tang, S. H. and S@ D. H.,
“Edge Extraction by Active Defocusing: Journal of
Spatial Visio~ VOL 5, NO. 4, 1991, pp. 253-268.
EiEiEt+””=-”-l
Fw?Mi!l
(a) co (c)

13g. 1.1 Conventional way of edge demti- Xe

no feedback i9 guovided Ftg. IU.4 Edge pixel pattcms of p@.

Elkl
●
●

Fig. 12 A closed-loop edge detedion system. Fig. IIM Edge pixel psttems of pJ4).

41–’–– IliEl? 8aanecom

@Hl!!!BEI
(a)
M (b) (c) (4)
●

Fig. 111.1 kannected

●

and 8-connected edges

FgB!l!!?
EEli
EB
●

00

El!!HIR”
RI
(i) 63

Fig. 111.6 Edge pixel @terns of M(5).

Fig. IIL2 Edge pixel pattern

of ~(l).

Fig. IIL7 Invalid edge pattam of p3(51

1.

•iiila
(d)

Fig. 1113 Edge pixel pa!terns of %(2). Fig. 111.8 Edge pixel patterns of %(6).

467
 pgq~~p#

(a) 00 (c)

F@ HL9 Edge pixel psttans of ~(’7).

(d)

Fl&lV3
LJJ_-
O*234SS

Anearly ideal edgeimage

799

andita edge

m w-
- -Wm.

(a) aigild imags (b) Edgeilnsge by LCmfJ=o.5@m=277)

Fig. IU.1O Edge pixel pa(tans of %(8).

Fig. 111.11 Edge pixel paaerns of p@). Fig. V.1 Edge imegu obtained m a process of varying
tbaacalcsofaslmop aa!oraccordingto all
objective edge evaluatksn.

h!!!!,,., (a)
Fig. NJ Histograms
L-b.
0s2s4s679s

and caeqonding
(u
edge images.
(a) Oligitialimage

F .. ..
.. -
(b) EdgeimsgewiUI hmshokivalue T=10

I 1

(a) ~ = 036 (b) ~=o.sl (c) $@@“ o~

Fig. IV.2 Edge images with different ~ti values.

468