A hybrid geometric-feature algorithm for 2D shape similarity
Vlachou, M. E.; Thomas, E.; Blouin, J.
Show abstract
In this paper, we address the problem of quantifying similarity between planar 2D shapes, which is relevant to studies of internal representations in cognitive, developmental, and neurological research. We designed a set of test shapes arranged along a visually defined perceptual similarity gradient and used them to evaluate classical geometric methods for shape comparison, including Procrustes and Chamfer distance, as well as a convolutional neural network (CNN)-inspired feature-based method. Based on the limitations identified for these individual methods, we developed a hybrid Geometric-Feature Similarity (GFS) algorithm that combines geometric alignment, global contour properties, and convolutional feature-based descriptors into a unified weighted similarity score. By combining global geometric information with local structural features, the GFS algorithm more accurately reproduces human perceptual judgments of shape similarity than either geometric or feature-based methods alone. Requiring neither network training nor large labelled datasets, the proposed algorithm provides an efficient and interpretable tool for a broad range of studies involving quantitative shape comparison.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Crystal or Jelly? Effect of Color on the Perception of Translucent Materials with Photographs of Real-world Objects 92%
- A deep convolutional neural network trained for lightness constancy is susceptible to lightness illusions 92%
- Visual discrimination of optical material properties: a large-scale study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- A database of digital line drawings that depict expected and unexpected action-place relationships 92%
- The influence of stereopsis on visual saliency in a proto-object based model of selective attention 92%
- Explicit and implicit depth-cue integration: evidence of systematic biases with real objects 91%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.