Comparison ( better, worse ):
comparison with two other algorithms: FG(Ma,2003)[1], SM(Itti,1998)[2]
Better (our result is comparable with the ground truth, if not better):
¡¡
| FG(Ma,2003) | SM(Itti,1998) | Our approach | Ground truth |
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
¡¡
Worse: (our result is worse than ground truth or other approaches): top
¡¡
| FG(Ma,2003) | SM(Itti,1998) | Our approach | Ground truth |
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() | |||
![]() | |||
1. Y.-F. Ma and H.-J. Zhang. Contrast-based image attention analysis by using fuzzy growing. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on Multimedia table of contents, pages 374¨C381, 2003.
2.L. Itti, C. Koch, and E. Niebur. A model of saliency-based visual attention for rapid scene analysis. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal.Mach. Intell., 20(11):1254¨C1259, 1998.