1991
DOI: 10.3133/ofr91301
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multifractals in image processing and process imaging

Abstract: Image data may be analyzed for a range of scale levels by generalizing high resolution measurements into an image pyramid whose statistical description is used to estimate a fractal dimension Dt for each value t of the image histogram. This multifractal analysis is demonstrated for a satellite image of Reston, Virginia, which is compared to data simulated by Gaussian and random walk processes. The behavior of the multifractal dimension is used to characterize simulated and empirical data and to detect low-and … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

1995
1995
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
(13 reference statements)
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As noted above, the fractal dimension serves poorly in distinguishing between scarps formed by different processes. The recognition of scale limitations of self-similar formative processes has led to the recognition of multi-fractals and techniques for identifying the multiple fractal dimensions and the scales of transition (e.g., Evertsz and Mandelbrot, 1992;De Cola, 1993;Lavalee et al, 1993). Nonetheless, if geomorphologists wish to contrast landscapes or compare models with reality, the restriction of comparative statistics to estimates of fractal dimension(s) will afford limited discriminatory power and poor confirmation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As noted above, the fractal dimension serves poorly in distinguishing between scarps formed by different processes. The recognition of scale limitations of self-similar formative processes has led to the recognition of multi-fractals and techniques for identifying the multiple fractal dimensions and the scales of transition (e.g., Evertsz and Mandelbrot, 1992;De Cola, 1993;Lavalee et al, 1993). Nonetheless, if geomorphologists wish to contrast landscapes or compare models with reality, the restriction of comparative statistics to estimates of fractal dimension(s) will afford limited discriminatory power and poor confirmation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are problems in classifying such images into land-use categories, but there is much research on this frontier at present within remote sensing, which bodes well for better classifications. There are even possibilities for improving image analysis by means of fractal statistics, which are naturally occurring measures for such images (de Cola, 1993).…”
Section: Conclusion: Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It also illustrates the more general fact pointed out by Gagalowicz [22], that the information provided by the second-order variogram may not be sufficient to discriminate the image spatial structures. Similarly to (24), the experimental first-order variogram is computed according to…”
Section: Experimental Results On Simulated Imagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two point statistics which describe the spatial relationships between data are thus more appropriate [21]- [23]. Garrigues et al [14] provide a comparison of some two point statistics metrics used to explore the spatial variations within an image which includes Haralick indexes [23], fractal and multifractal analysis [24]- [28], Fourier transform [29], [30], wavelet transform [6], [25], [30], and second-order variogram [15], [31]- [37]. Among these metrics, it is shown in Garrigues et al [14] that modeling the second-order variogram of high spatial resolution NDVI image is an efficient method to characterize the spatial structures of the landscape.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%