Comparative Analysis of Conventional, Real and Complex Wavelet Transforms For Face Recognition
Comparative Analysis of Conventional, Real and Complex Wavelet Transforms For Face Recognition
Comparative Analysis of Conventional, Real and Complex Wavelet Transforms For Face Recognition
|
\ .
. Then, the feature vector can be formed by
concatenating the rows or columns of all the subbands at J
th
level. For example, the feature vector size for conventional
DWT, R-DT-DWT, and C-DT-DWT at 4 J = will be
4
2 2
J J
N N | |
|
\ .
, 2 4
2 2
J J
N N ( | |
| (
\ .
and
2 2 4
2 2
J J
N N ( | |
| (
\ .
respectively. For our
experiments, the input images are initially scaled to 64 64
. Independent analysis of DWT, R-DT-DWT and C-DT-DWT
was done at third and fourth level.
The R-DT-DWT and C-DT-DWT subbands of a face image
are shown in Figure 7.
3.4 Similarity Measures
The similarity measures used in our experiments to evaluate
the efficiency of different representation and recognition
methods include Euclidean distance, city block distance, and
cosine distance. If,
X: mx-by-n data matrix treated as mx (1 ) n row vectors x
1
,
x
2
, ..., x
mx
, and
Y: my-by-n data matrix treated as my (1 ) n row vectors y
1
,
y
2
, ..., y
my
,
then, the similarity measures between the vectors x
s
and y
t
are
defined as follows:
A. City Block distance (L1 distance):
1
n
st sj tj
j
d x y
=
=
(4)
(a) Input face image
(b) R-DT-DWT subbands of input image
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 8887)
Volume 39 No.6, February 2012
10
(c) C-DT-DWT subbands of input image
Fig 7: R-DT-DWT and C-DT-DWT subbands of a face
image.
B. Euclidean distance (L2 distance):
2
( )( )'
st s t s t
d x y x y = (5)
C. Cosine distance:
'
' '
1
( )( )
s t
st
s s s s
x y
d
x x y y
| |
| =
|
\ .
(6)
3.5 Results
For each subject of each database, about half of the images
were used for training purpose and remaining others for
testing. The results are tabulated in Table 1. The efficiency of
recognition can be calculated as follows,
100%
correctly recognized face images
Efficiency
total number of input face images
=
The results show that no particular distancemetric
combination is the best across all standard benchmark face
databases. However, overall performance for city block
distance measure is found to be better as compared to the
Euclidean and Cosine distance in many cases. Also, the
performance of R-DT-DWT and C-DT-DWT based features
are found to be about equally efficient in many cases.
4. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented an independent, comparative study of
DWT, R-DT-DWT and C-DT-DWT based face recognition
methods with their accompanied three distance metrics (L1,
L2 and cosine), at different levels, and in completely equal
working conditions.
Our comparative research shows that no particular distance
metric combination is the best across all standard benchmark
face databases. This verifies the contribution made by Delac
et al. [26]. In addition, however, overall performance for city
block distance measure was found to be better as compared to
the Euclidean and cosine distance in many cases. Also, the
performance of R-DT-DWT and C-DT-DWT based features
were found to be about equally efficient in many cases.
Although C-DT-DWT has the benefit of being both oriented
and approximately analytic, the overall performance of R-DT-
DWT and C-DT-DWT based features are found to be about
equally efficient in many cases for face recognition. So taking
redundancy into consideration, it may be suggested to opt for
R-DT-DWT for efficient face recognition.
4. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank the teaching, non-teaching
staff members and M.Tech students from Electronics
department of Shri Guru Gobind Singhji Institute of
Engineering and Technology, Nanded (Maharashtra, India)
for their cooperation in creating the SGGSIET face database.
The authors would like to thank those researchers who have
kindly provided the public face databases such as FERET,
ORL, Yale, JAFFE, IITK, CVSR, University of Bern, and
Georgia Tech. Authors would also like to thank Dr.
Kingsbury (Cambridge University) and Prof. Selesnick
(Polytechnic University, NY, USA) for answering the queries.
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 8887)
Volume 39 No.6, February 2012
11
Table 1: Face Recognition Results.
5. REFERENCES
[1] W. Zhao, R. Chellappa, A. Rosenfeld, P. J. Phillips, Face
Recognition: A Literature Survey, ACM Computing
Surveys, 35(4): 399-458, 2003.
[2] N. Kingsbury. The dual-tree complex wavelet transform:
A new technique for shift invariance and directional
filters. IEEE Digital Signal Processing Workshop, DSP
98, paper no. 86, August 1998.
[3] I. Selesnick, R. Baraniuk, and N. Kingsbury. The dual-
tree complex wavelet transform. IEEE Signal Process.
Mag., 22(6):123151, Nov. 2005.
[4] A. F. Abdelnour and I. W. Selesnick. Nearly symmetric
orthogonal wavelet bases. In Proceedings of IEEE
International Conference on Acoustic, Speech, Signal
Processing (ICASSP), May 2001.
[5] A. A. Bhurane. Face Recognition using Dual-Tree
Discrete Wavelet Transforms. M.Tech Thesis, S.G.G.S.
Institute of Engineering and Technology, Nanded,
Maharashtra, India, July 2011.
[6] The color FERET database, USA. Website.
http://face.nist.gov/colorferet/.
[7] AT & T: The database of faces (formerly: The ORL
database of faces). Website.
http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/Research/DTG/attarchive/faced
atabase.html.
[8] The Yale face database. Website.
http://cvc.yale.edu/projects/yalefaces/yalefaces.html.
[9] The Japanese Female Facial Expression (JAFFE)
database. Website. http://www.kasrl.org/jaffe.html.
[10] The University of Bern face database. Website.
http://www.ph.tn.tudelft.nl/PRInfo/data/msg00010.html.
[11] The IITK face database. Website. http://vis-
www.cs.umass.edu/~vidit/IndianFaceDatabase/.
[12] The CVSR Grimace database. Website.
http://cswww.essex.ac.uk/mv/allfaces/index.html.
[13] The Georgia Tech. face database. Website.
http://www.anefian.com/research/GTdb_crop.zip.
Distance
Measures
Database
Efficiency (%)
J = 3 J = 4
DWT
R-DT-
DWT
C-DT-
DWT
DWT R-DT-DWT
C-DT-
DWT
Euclidean
FERET 74.33 73.33 73.33 73.33 73.66 73.66
ORL 93.50 93.50 93.50 92.50 94.00 94.00
Yale 87.77 88.88 88.88 85.55 85.55 85.55
JAFFE
92.00 91.00 91.00 90.00 91.00 91.00
University of Bern 92.00 91.33 91.33 90.66 92.00 92.00
IITK
IITK (Male) 74.16 70.00 70.83 72.50 73.33 73.33
IITK (Female) 86.66 86.66 85.83 87.50 87.50 88.33
CVSR (Grimace) 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66
Georgia Tech. 71.00 71.50 71.50 70.50 69.75 70.00
SGGS 67.43 66.92 66.92 62.05 62.56 63.07
POSTECH 72.88 73.33 73.11 63.77 64.00 64.00
Average Efficiency 82.58 82.10 82.08 80.45 80.91 81.05
Cityblock
FERET 77.66 79.33 78.33 74.66 75.33 75.33
ORL 95.00 96.00 96.50 95.00 95.55 95.50
Yale 94.44 95.55 95.55 93.33 93.33 94.44
JAFFE
95.00 97.00 97.00 97.00 96.00 96.00
University of Bern 94.00 94.66 95.33 94.66 95.33 95.33
IITK
IITK (Male) 75.00 77.50 77.50 74.16 76.66 76.00
IITK (Female) 86.66 88.33 88.33 89.16 90.00 89.16
CVSR (Grimace) 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66
Georgia Tech. 72.75 72.75 73.00 72.00 72.25 72.75
SGGS 77.94 77.69 77.17 71.53 74.35 74.61
POSTECH 82.44 82.66 83.33 75.11 72.88 73.77
Average Efficiency 86.14 87.10 87.15 84.84 85.30 85.41
Cosine
FERET 84.00 84.33 84.33 83.00 82.00 82.33
ORL 98.83 92.00 92.00 93.00 83.50 94.00
Yale 91.11 92.22 92.22 87.77 90.00 90.00
JAFFE
96.00 96.00 96.00 98.00 98.00 97.00
University of Bern 90.00 90.66 90.66 88.00 88.00 88.00
IITK
IITK (Male) 69.16 67.50 67.50 70.83 70.00 69.16
IITK (Female) 87.50 87.50 87.50 89.16 89.16 89.16
CVSR (Grimace) 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66 96.66
Georgia Tech. 65.75 65.75 65.75 67.75 68.50 68.75
SGGS 72.56 71.53 71.53 69.74 69.48 69.23
POSTECH 72.44 72.66 72.66 62.22 63.33 63.55
Average Efficiency 84.00 83.34 83.34 82.37 81.69 82.53
International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 8887)
Volume 39 No.6, February 2012
12
[14] The SGGS face database. Website. http://sggs.ac.in.
[15] L. Nanni and D. Maio, Weighted sub-Gabor for Face
Recognition, Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 28, no. 4,
pp. 487492, 2007.
[16] W.-P. Choi, S.-H. Tse, K.-W. Wong, and K.-M. Lam,
Simplified Gabor Wavelets for Human Face
Recognition, Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 41, no. 3,
pp. 11861199, 2008.
[17] D.-H. Liu, K.-M. Lam, and L.-S. Shen, Optimal
Sampling of Gabor Features for Face Recognition,
Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 267276,
2004.
[18] E P Simoncelli, W T Freeman, E H Adelson and D J
Heeger, Shiftable Multiscale Transforms, IEEE
Transactions on Information Theory, 38(2), pp 587-607,
March 1992.
[19] N G Kingsbury, The Dual-Tree Complex Wavelet
Transform: A New Technique for Shift Invariance and
Directional Filters, Proc. 8th IEEE DSP Workshop,
Bryce Canyon, Aug 1998.
[20] N G Kingsbury: The Dual-Tree Complex Wavelet
Transform: A New Efficient Tool for Image Restoration
and Enhancement, Proc. EUSIPCO 98, Rhodes, Sept
1998.
[21] H. E. Sankaran, A. P. Gotchev, K. O. Egiazarian, and J.
T. Astola, Complex Wavelets versus Gabor Wavelets
for Facial Feature Extraction: A Comparative Study, in
Image Processing: Algorithms and Systems IV, vol. 5672
of Proceedings of SPIE, pp. 407415, San Jose, Calif,
USA, January 2005.
[22] T. Celik, H. Ozkaramanli, and H. Demirel, Facial
Feature Extraction using Complex Dual-Tree Wavelet
Transform, Computer Vision and Image Understanding,
vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 229246, 2008.
[23] A. Eleyan, H. Ozkaramanli, and H. Demirel, Complex
Wavelet Transform-Based Face Recognition, EURASIP
Journal on Advances in Signal Processing, 2008, Article
ID 185281.
[24] Y. Sun and M. Du, DT-CWT Feature Based
Classification using Orthogonal Neighborhood
Preserving Projections for Face Recognition, in
Proceedings of the International Conference on
Computational Intelligence and Security (CIS 06), pp.
719 724, Guangzhou, China, November 2006.
[25] Y. Sun, DT-CWT Feature based Face Recognition
using Supervised Kernel ONPP, in Proceedings of the
International Conference on Computational Intelligence
and Security Workshops (CISW 07), pp. 312315,
Harbin, China, December 2007.
[26] Delac K., Grgic M., and Grgic S. Independent
comparative study of PCA, ICA, and LDA on the
FERET data set. Wiley Periodicals, 15:252260, 2005.
[27] Bhurane A.A. and Talbar S.N. Vision-based
authenticated robotic control using face and hand gesture
recognition, International Conference on on Electronics
Computer Technology (ICECT 2011), vol V-1, pp 6468.
ICECT, IEEE, April 2011.