Evaluating the effect of infrared image enhancement on human target detection performance and image quality judgment

Abstract

We address the problem of the way in which different, wellknown and commonly used image enhancement techniques effect qualitative human image judgments, and quantitative target detection performance. Two different psychophysical experiments are specially designed and performed to show how smoothing, full dynamic range exploitation, contrast and edge enhancement affect human abilities regarding target detection in IR imagery, and how this effect varies with imaging time and target thermal condition. Analysis of results shows systematic dependence on enhancement methods, very good agreement between image quality judgments and both target detection rates and probabilities. Significant interaction between enhancement methods and the time of day when the image is taken is also found. © 1999 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers. [S0091-3286(99) Subject terms: image enhancement; target detection; psychophysical experiments; law of comparative judgment; analysis of variance.Paper 980313

P-33: Identification of Simulated Targets as a Function of Target and Background Blur

“…Most of the perceptual research involving FLIR imagery seems to have been performed in the context of either testing particular visual models [8,9] or characterizing aspects of IR imagery that may be relevant to visual performance [1,2,4,5]. The data of Driggers et.…”

Improving Infrared Images for Standoff Object Detection

“…Other techniques have been investigated (see [1,5]) including the Target Task Performance (TTP) metric (discussed in [3]), which is based on a measure of the information content of an image.…”

The impact of night vision goggles on wayfinding performance and the acquisition of spatial knowledge

“…Empirical evidence from recent studies suggests that degraded static visual cues can affect landmark and target acquisition and recognition (Barber, 1990;Aviram & Rotman, 1999;Seamon, et al, 1997;Wells & Venturino, 1990). For example, changes in image contrast (such as when viewing environment through NVGs and HMDs) can make recognition o f objects and landmarks more difficult by reducing spatial information detail caused by a decrease in the local contrast among adjacent features o f objects and landmarks (Geri, et.…”

“…For example, changes in image contrast (such as when viewing environment through NVGs and HMDs) can make recognition o f objects and landmarks more difficult by reducing spatial information detail caused by a decrease in the local contrast among adjacent features o f objects and landmarks (Geri, et. al., 2002;Niall, et al, 1999;Aviram & Rotman, 1999;Klymenko, Harding, Beasley, Martin & Rash, 1999). Likewise, it has been reported that performance in target detection decreases as image contrast decreases (Uttal & Gibb, 2001; Aviram & Rotman, 1999).…”

“…al., 2002;Niall, et al, 1999;Aviram & Rotman, 1999;Klymenko, Harding, Beasley, Martin & Rash, 1999). Likewise, it has been reported that performance in target detection decreases as image contrast decreases (Uttal & Gibb, 2001; Aviram & Rotman, 1999).…”