I am trying to do BRISK my own code in matlab.
Where ı am stack, ı don't understand what this expression means.
let us consider one of the N*(N −1)/2 sampling-point pairs (pi, pj).
A = {(pi, pj) ∈ R2 × R2 | i < N ∧ j < i ∧ i, j ∈ N }
The other my question , what is the difference between local gradient and global gradient?
The expression means that you are looking at a pair of pixels (pi, pj), such that both pixels belong to the region R2 x R2, and the two pixels cannot be the same.
Gradient is a vector (Ix, Iy), where Ix is the first derivative in the x direction, and Iy is the first derivative in the y direction. This vector is defined at a point, so gradient is local by definition. I don't know what global gradient means. More context may help here.
Given that we have set of points of size N. N*(N −1)/2 is N choose 2 which equals number of subsets of size 2 that can be taken from a set of size N ( a concept in probability called Combinations). Because you are working with pair of points you need subset size to be 2.
R refers to the set of all real numbers ( a single value). When it is squared it refers to the Cartesian plane, so pi is a pair of real numbers(x,y), a point in the Cartesian plane.
The character '^' is AND operation. So all the following conditions has to be satisfied:
the index i of the first point, pi, should be less than N
the index j of the second point must be less than the index of the first point.
Like i, j must also be less than N
Local gradient is computed locally on the pair of pixels pi and pj. while, global gradient is estimated for the region surrounding the keypoint by accumulating local gradients.
Related
I have an image of a cytoskeleton. There are a lot of small objects inside and I want to calculate the length between all of them in every axis and to get a matrix with all this data. I am trying to do this in matlab.
My final aim is to figure out if there is any axis with a constant distance between the object.
I've tried bwdist and to use connected components without any luck.
Do you have any other ideas?
So, the end goal is that you want to globally stretch this image in a certain direction (linearly) so that the distances between nearest pairs end up the closest together, hopefully the same? Or may you do more complex stretching ? (note that with arbitrarily complex one you can always make it work :) )
If linear global one, distance in x' and y' is going to be a simple multiplication of the old distance in x and y, applied to every pair of points. So, the final euclidean distance will end up being sqrt((SX*x)^2 + (SY*y)^2), with SX being stretch in x and SY stretch in y; X and Y are distances in X and Y between pairs of points.
If you are interested in just "the same" part, solution is not so difficult:
Find all objects of interest and put their X and Y coordinates in a N*2 matrix.
Calculate distances between all pairs of objects in X and Y. You will end up with 2 matrices sized N*N (with 0 on the diagonal, symmetric and real, not sure what is the name for that type of matrix).
Find minimum distance (say this is between A an B).
You probably already have this. Now:
Take C. Make N-1 transformations, which all end up in C->nearestToC = A->B. It is a simple system of equations, you have X1^2*SX^2+Y1^2*SY^2 = X2^2*SX^2+Y2*SY^2.
So, first say A->B = C->A, then A->B = C->B, then A->B = C->D etc etc. Make sure transformation is normalized => SX^2 + SY^2 = 1. If it cannot be found, the only valid transformation is SX = SY = 0 which means you don't have solution here. Obviously, SX and SY need to be real.
Note that this solution is unique except in case where X1 = X2 and Y1 = Y2. In this case, grab some other point than C to find this transformation.
For each transformation check the remaining points and find all nearest neighbours of them. If distance is always the same as these 2 (to a given tolerance), great, you found your transformation. If not, this transformation does not work and you should continue with the next one.
If you want a transformation that minimizes variations between distances (but doesn't require them to be nearly equal), I would do some optimization method and search for a minimum - I don't know how to find an exact solution otherwise. I would pick this also in case you don't have linear or global stretch.
If i understand your question correctly, the first step is to obtain all of the objects center of mass points in the image as (x,y) coordinates. Then, you can easily compute all of the distances between all points. I suggest taking a look on a histogram of those distances which may provide some information as to the nature of distance distribution (for example if it is uniformly random, or are there any patterns that appear).
Obtaining the center of mass points is not an easy task, consider transforming the image into a binary one, or some sort of background subtraction with blob detection or/and edge detector.
For building a histogram you can use histogram.
I have a set of climate data (temperature, pressure and moisture for example), X, Y, Z which are matricies with dimensions (n x p) where n is the number of observations and p is the number of spatial points.
Previously, to investigate modes of variability in dataset X, I simply performed a empirical orthogonal function (EOF) analysis OR Principle component Analysis (PCA) on X. This involved decomposing (via SVD), the matrix X.
To investigate the coupling of the modes of variability of X and Y, I used maximum covariance analysis (MCA) which involved decomposing a covariance matrix proportional to XY^{T}. (T is transpose)
However, if I wish to looked at all three datasets, how do I go about doing this? One idea I had was to form a fourth matrix, L, which will be the 'feature' concatenation of the three datasets:
L = [X, Y, Z]
so that my matrix L will have dimensions (n x 3p).
I would then use standard PCA/EOF analysis and use SVD to decompose this matrix L and then I would obtain modes of variabiilty with size (3p x 1) and thus subsequently the mode associated with X is the first p values, the mode associated with Y is the second set of p values and the mode associated with Z is the last p values.
Is this correct? Or can anyone suggest a better way of looking at the coupling of all three (or more) datasets?
Thank you so much!
I'd recommend to treat spatial points as extra dimension, i.e. f x n x p, where 'f' is your number of features. At this point you should use multilinear extension of PCA that can work on tensor data.
The title of this post may be a bit confusing. Please allow me to provide a bit of context and then elaborate on what I'm asking. For your reference, the question I'm asking is toward the end and is denoted by bold letters. I provide some code, outlining where I'm currently at in solving the problem, immediately beforehand.
Essentially what I'm trying to do is Kernel Regression, which is usually done using a single test point x and a set of training instances . A reference to this can be found on wikipedia here. The kernel I'm using is the RBF kernel, a Wikipedia reference for which can be found here.
Anyway, I have some code written in Matlab so that this can be done quickly for a single instance of x, which is 1 x p in size. What I'd like to do is make it so I can estimate for numerous points very quickly, say m x p.
For the sake of avoiding notational mixups, I'll let the training instances be denoted Train and the instances I want estimates for as Test: and . It also needs to be mentioned that I want to estimate a vector of numbers for each of the m points. For a single point this vector would be 1 x v in size. Now I need it to be m x v. Therefore, Train will also have a vector of these know values associated with it called TS: . Lastly, we need a vector of sigmas that is 1 x v in size. This is denoted as Sig.
Here's the code I have so far:
%First, we have to get the matrices to equivalent size so we can subtract Train from Test
tm0 = kron(ones(size(Train,1),1),Test) - kron(ones(size(Test,1),1),Train);
%Secondly, we apply the Euclidean norm sq by row and then multiply each of these results by each element (j) in Sig times 1/2j^2
tm3 = exp(-kron(sum((tm0).^2,2),1/2./(Sig.^2)));
Now, at this point tm3 is an (m*n) x v matrix. This is where my question is: I now need to multiply TS' (TS transpose) times each of the n x v-sized segments in tm3 (there are m of these segments), get the diagonal elements of each of these resulting segments (after multiplication one of the m segments will be v x v, so each chunk of diagonal elements will be 1 x v meaning the resulting matrix is m x v) and sum these diagonal elements together to produce an m x 1 sized matrix. Lastly, I will need to divide each entry i in this m x 1 matrix by each of the v elements in the ith row of the diagonal-holding m x v-sized matrix, producing an m x v-sized result matrix.
I hope all of that makes sense. I'm sure there's some kind of trick that can be employed, but I'm just not coming up with it. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Edit 1: I was asked to provide more of an example to help demonstrate what it is that I would like done. The following represent that two matrices I'm talking about, TS and tm3:
As you can see, TS'(TS transpose) is v x n and tm3 is mn x v. In tm3 there are blocks that are of size n x v -- there are m blocks of this size. Notice that the size of TS' is of size v x n. This means that I can multiply TS' by a single block of tm3, which again is of size n x v. This would result in a matrix that is v x v in size. I would like to do this operation -- individually multiplying TS' by each of the n x v-sized blocks of tm3, which would produce m v x v matrices.
From here, though, I would like to obtain the diagonal elements from each of these v x v matrices. So, for a single v x v matrix, denoted using a:
Ultimately, I would to do this for each of the m v x v matrices giving me something that looks like the following, where s is the mth v x v matrix:
If I denote this last matrix as Q, which is m x v in size, it is trivial to sum the elements across the rows to produce the m x 1 vector I was looking for. I will refer to this vector as C. However, I would then like to divide each of these m scalar values by the corresponding row of matrix Q, to produce another m x v matrix:
This is the final matrix I'm looking for. Hopefully this helps make it clear what I'm looking for. Thanks for taking the time to read this!
Thought: I'm pretty sure I could accomplish this by converting tm3 to a cell matrix by doing tc1 = mat2cell(tm3,repmat(length(Train),1,m),length(Sig)), and then put replicate TS m times in another cell matrix tc2 = mat2cell(TS',length(indirectSigma),repmat(length(Train),1,m))'. Finally, I could do operations like tc3 = cellfun(#(a,b) a*b, tc2,tc1,'UniformOutput',false), which would give me m cells filled with the v x v matrices I was looking for. I could proceed from there. However, I'm not sure how fast these cell operations are. Can anybody comment? I'm afraid they might be slow, so I would prefer operations be performed on normal matrices, which I know to be fast. Thanks!
Suppose I have a matrix A, the size of which is 2000*1000 double. Then I apply
Matlab build in function "kmeans"to the matrix A.
k = 8;
[idx,C] = kmeans(A, k, 'Distance', 'cosine');
I get C = 8*1000 double; idx = 2000*1 double, with values from 1 to 8;
According to the documentation, C returns the k cluster centroid locations in the k-by-p (8 by 1000) matrix. And idx returns an n-by-1 vector containing cluster indices of each observation.
My question is:
1) I do not know how to understand the C, the centroid locations. Locations should be represented as (x,y), right? How to understand the matrix C correctly?
2) What are the final centers c1, c2,...,ck? Are they just values or locations?
3) For each cluster, if I only want to get the vector closest to the center of this cluster, how to calculate and get it?
Thanks!
Before I answer the three parts, I'll just explain the syntax that is used in MATLAB's explanation of k-means (http://www.mathworks.com/help/stats/kmeans.html).
A is your data matrix (it's represented as X in the link). There are n rows (in this case, 2000), which represent the number of observations/data points that you have. There are also p columns (in this case, 1000), which represent the number of "features" that each data points has. For example, if your data consisted of 2D points, then p would equal 2.
k is the number of clusters that you want to group the data into. Based on the dimensions of C that you gave, k must be 8.
Now I will answer the three parts:
The C matrix has dimensions k x p. Each row represents a centroid. Centroid locations DO NOT have to be (x, y) at all. The dimensions of the centroid locations are equal to p. In other words, if you have 2D points, you could graph the centroids as (x, y). If you have 3D points, you could graph the centroids as (x, y, z). Since each data point in A has 1000 features, your centroids therefore have 1000 dimensions.
This is sort of difficult to explain without knowing what your data is exactly. Centroids are certainly not just values, and they may not necessarily be locations. If your data A were coordinate points, you could certainly represent the centroids as locations. However, we can view it more generally. If you had a cluster centroid i and the data points v that are grouped with that centroid, the centroid would represent the data point that is most similar to those in its cluster. Hopefully, that makes sense, and I can give a clearer explanation if necessary.
The k-means method actually gives us a good way to accomplish this. The function actually has 4 possible outputs, but I will focus on the 4th, which I will call D:
[idx,C,sumd,D] = kmeans(A, k, 'Distance', 'cosine');
D has dimensions n x k. For a data point i, the row i in the D matrix gives the distance from that point to every centroid. Therefore, for each centroid, you simply need to find the data point closest to this, and return that corresponding data point. I can supply the short code for this if you need it.
Also, just a tip. You should probably use kmeans++ method of initializing the centroids. It's faster and generally better. You can call it using this:
[idx,C,sumd,D] = kmeans(A, k, 'Distance', 'cosine', 'Start', 'plus');
Edit:
Here is the code necessary for part 3:
[~, min_idxs] = min(D, [], 1);
closest_vecs = A(min_idxs, :);
Each row i of closest_vecs is the vector that is closest to centroid i.
OK, before we actually get into the details, let's give a brief overview on what K-means clustering is first.
k-means clustering works such that for some data that you have, you want to group them into k groups. You initially choose k random points in your data, and these will have labels from 1,2,...,k. These are what we call the centroids. Then, you determine how close the rest of the data are to each of these points. You then group those points so that whichever points are closest to any of these k points, you assign those points to belong to that particular group (1,2,...,k). After, for all of the points for each group, you update the centroids, which actually is defined as the representative point for each group. For each group, you compute the average of all of the points in each of the k groups. These become the new centroids for the next iteration. In the next iteration, you determine how close each point in your data is to each of the centroids. You keep iterating and repeating this behaviour until the centroids don't move anymore, or they move very little.
How you use the kmeans function in MATLAB is that assuming you have a data matrix (A in your case), it is arranged such that each row is a sample and each column is a feature / dimension of a sample. For example, we could have N x 2 or N x 3 arrays of Cartesian coordinates, either in 2D or 3D. In colour images, we could have N x 3 arrays where each column is a colour component in an image - red, green or blue.
How you invoke kmeans in MATLAB is the following way:
[IDX, C] = kmeans(X, K);
X is the data matrix we talked about, K is the total number of clusters / groups you would like to see and the outputs IDX and C are respectively an index and centroid matrix. IDX is a N x 1 array where N is the total number of samples that you have put into the function. Each value in IDX tells you which centroid the sample / row in X best matched with a particular centroid. You can also override the distance measure used to measure the distance between points. By default, this is the Euclidean distance, but you used the cosine distance in your invocation.
C has K rows where each row is a centroid. Therefore, for the case of Cartesian coordinates, this would be a K x 2 or K x 3 array. Therefore, you would interpret IDX as telling which group / centroid that the point is closest to when computing k-means. As such, if we got a value of IDX=1 for a point, this means that the point best matched with the first centroid, which is the first row of C. Similarly, if we got a value of IDX=1 for a point, this means that the point best matched with the third centroid, which is the third row of C.
Now to answer your questions:
We just talked about C and IDX so this should be clear.
The final centres are stored in C. Each row gives you a centroid / centre that is representative of a group.
It sounds like you want to find the closest point to each cluster in the data, besides the actual centroid itself. That's easy to do if you use knnsearch which performs K-Nearest Neighbour search by giving a set of points and it outputs the K closest points within your data that are close to a query point. As such, you supply the clusters as the input and your data as the output, then use K=2 and skip the first point. The first point will have a distance of 0 as this will be equal to the centroid itself and the second point will give you the closest point that is closest to the cluster.
You can do that by the following, assuming you already ran kmeans:
out = knnsearch(A, C, 'k', 2);
out = out(:,2);
You run knnsearch, then toss out the closest point as it would essentially have a distance of 0. The second column is what you're after, which gives you the closest point to the cluster excluding the actual centroid. out will give you which points in your data matrix A that was closest to each centroid. To get the actual points, do this:
pts = A(out,:);
Hope this helps!
I am trying to create an orthogonal coordinate system based on two "almost" perpendicular vectors, which are deduced from medical images. I have two vectors, for example:
Z=[-1.02,1.53,-1.63];
Y=[2.39,-1.39,-2.8];
that are almost perpendicular, since their inner product is equal to 5e-4.
Then I find their cross product to create my 3rd basis:
X=cross(Y,Z);
Even this third vector is not completely orthogonal to Z and Y, as their inner products are in the order of -15 and -16, but I guess that is almost zero. In order to use this set of vectors as my orthogonal basis for a local coordinate system, I assume they should be almost completely perpendicular. I first thought I can do this by rounding my vectors to less decimal figures, but did not help. I guess I need to find a way to alter my initial vectors a little to make them more perpendicular, but I don't know how to do that.
I would appreciate any suggestions.
Gram-Schmidt is right as pointed out above.
Basically, you want to subtract the component of Y that is in the direction of Z from Y (Note: you can alternatively operate on Z instead of Y).
The component of Y in the Z direction is given by:
dot(Y,Z)*Z/(norm(Z)^2)
(projection of Y onto Z)
Note that if Y is orthogonal to Z, then this is 0.
So:
Y = Y - dot(Y,Z)*Z/(norm(Z)^2)
and Z stays unchanged.
let V=Y+aZ
Z dot V = 0 so you can solve a and get V
Now use V and Z as you basis
You may need to normalize the vectors and use double type to get the desired precision.