Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Speeded up robust features

Speeded Up Robust Features () is a - and -invariant interest point detector and descriptor in , designed to identify and characterize local features that remain detectable under variations in , , illumination, and viewpoint changes. Introduced in 2006 by Herbert Bay, Tinne Tuytelaars, and Luc Van Gool, SURF facilitates applications such as , , , and camera calibration by enabling reliable matching of image correspondences. SURF's detection phase employs a Fast-Hessian detector based on the determinant, approximated using box filters and integral images for rapid convolution computations across multiple scales. This approach constructs an structure similar to (SIFT) but leverages determinant of (DoH) responses filtered at 9×9 and 15×15 scales with a step size of 2, achieving interest point localization through non-maximum suppression in a 3D . For orientation assignment, SURF computes responses in the horizontal and vertical directions within a circular neighborhood, selecting the dominant orientation weighted by a Gaussian centered on the interest point. The descriptor in is a 64-dimensional vector derived from responses (horizontal and vertical, plus absolute values for polarity invariance) sampled over a 4×4 sub-region grid around each interest point, with responses summed and weighted by a Gaussian to emphasize central contributions. An extended variant, SURF-128, incorporates an additional sign-of-Laplacian measure to enhance distinctiveness, resulting in a 128-dimensional descriptor at the cost of slightly increased computation. Matching between descriptors uses a simple metric, often with best-bin ratio or cross-checking for robustness. Compared to SIFT, demonstrates comparable or superior and distinctiveness in benchmarks, while being 3–5 times faster in detection and up to three times faster in overall matching due to its lower dimensionality and efficient approximations. Experimental evaluations on datasets like the Affine Covariant Regions show SURF outperforming SIFT, GLOH, and PCA-SIFT in recall-precision curves for viewpoint and scale changes, with recognition rates of 82.6% for standard SURF and 85.7% for SURF-128 in real-world tasks. Despite its speed advantages, SURF's approximations can introduce minor precision losses under extreme distortions, though it remains a foundational method in feature-based vision pipelines.

Overview and History

Definition and Motivation

Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF) is a scale- and rotation-invariant interest point detector and descriptor used in for tasks such as and matching. Introduced in 2006 by Herbert Bay, Tinne Tuytelaars, and Luc Van Gool at the European Conference on Computer Vision, SURF builds upon the (SIFT) by prioritizing computational speed without sacrificing key invariances to scale, rotation, and illumination variations. The core of SURF's detection relies on the of the to identify blob-like structures in the image, approximating Gaussian derivatives through efficient filters. For description, it employs responses within a neighborhood around each detected point to form a robust 64-dimensional that captures local intensity patterns. The algorithm is patented, which has influenced its implementation in open-source libraries like , where it requires non-free modules for use. The Hessian matrix in two dimensions is defined as H(\mathbf{x}, \sigma) = \begin{bmatrix} L_{xx}(\mathbf{x}, \sigma) & L_{xy}(\mathbf{x}, \sigma) \\ L_{xy}(\mathbf{x}, \sigma) & L_{yy}(\mathbf{x}, \sigma) \end{bmatrix}, where L denotes the convolution of the image with a Gaussian kernel at scale \sigma. This formulation enables blob detection by identifying local maxima of the determinant in scale space. SURF's motivation stems from SIFT's high computational cost, which limits its applicability in real-time scenarios; by leveraging integral images for rapid convolution and box filters to approximate scale-space representations, SURF achieves up to three times the speed of SIFT while maintaining comparable repeatability and robustness on benchmark datasets. This efficiency makes it particularly suitable for resource-constrained environments in computer vision applications.

Development and Publication

Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF) was developed by Herbert Bay, Tinne Tuytelaars, and Luc Van Gool, with Bay and Van Gool affiliated with the Computer Vision and Geometry Laboratory at , and Tuytelaars based at the (). The algorithm emerged as an efficient alternative to existing feature detectors, leveraging approximations to achieve computational speed while maintaining robustness to scale and rotation changes. Development was supported by funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) NCCR Interactive Multimodal Information Management (IM.2) project, (TME), and the Flemish Fund for Scientific Research (FWO-Vlaanderen). The first publication of appeared as the paper "SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features" at the 9th European Conference on (ECCV 2006), held in , , from May 7–13. This seminal work detailed the detector and descriptor, demonstrating its performance on benchmark datasets like the Affine Covariant Regions. The algorithm was also described in a follow-up journal article in Computer Vision and Image Understanding in 2008, expanding on experimental evaluations. The core SURF algorithm is protected by patent US 8,165,401 B2, titled "Robust interest point detector and descriptor," filed on April 30, 2007, by the inventors , Tuytelaars, and , and granted on April 24, 2012, to and . This patent covers the Hessian-based detection and response descriptor construction, restricting use without licensing until its expiration around 2027. Initial reception highlighted SURF's computational efficiency, reporting approximately three times the speed of SIFT on standard hardware (e.g., 354 ms vs. 1036 ms for feature extraction on image sequences) while offering comparable or superior repeatability and matching accuracy. By 2025, the original ECCV paper had amassed over 40,000 citations, underscoring its high impact in research and applications such as and . This influence extended to open-source libraries, notably its integration into the library's xfeatures2d module starting from version 2.4, where it served as a patented but accessible tool for developers, though requiring separate compilation for non-academic use. Patent constraints prompted the release of non-patented variants and approximations, such as upright SURF (U-SURF) omitting rotation estimation and alternative descriptors like those in the VLFeat library, particularly after 2010 as licensing considerations evolved alongside expiring related patents like SIFT's.

Algorithm Fundamentals

Integral Images for Efficient Computation

Integral images, also known as summed-area tables, are a preprocessing technique employed in the Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF) algorithm to enable rapid computation of rectangular region sums within an . The integral image I(x, y) at position (x, y) represents the sum of all pixel intensities from the top-left corner at (1, 1) to (x, y), inclusive. It is computed recursively using the formula: I(x, y) = I(x-1, y) + I(x, y-1) - I(x-1, y-1) + i(x, y) where i(x, y) denotes the intensity of the original image at (x, y), and boundary conditions set I(0, y) = 0 and I(x, 0) = 0. This structure allows the sum over any upright rectangular area to be evaluated in constant time, O(1), by performing just four array accesses and three arithmetic operations, regardless of the region's size. In , the integral image serves as a foundational preprocessing step to accelerate the evaluation of responses, which approximate the derivatives of Gaussian filters needed for constructing the in feature detection. By transforming the input image into its integral representation once at the outset, subsequent convolutions with —used to mimic Gaussian smoothing and differentiation—become highly efficient, as each filter response can be derived from simple summations over predefined rectangular areas. This approach facilitates the computation of responses, which are integral to both the detector and descriptor components of . The primary advantage of integral images over direct Gaussian convolution lies in the dramatic reduction of computational complexity: while convolving with a filter of size n \times n typically requires O(n^2) operations per pixel, the integral image method achieves the same result in constant time per query, independent of filter dimensions. This efficiency enables SURF to scale effectively across multiple filter sizes without prohibitive costs, contributing to its overall speed advantage—reported as over three times faster than comparable Difference-of-Gaussian methods in the original implementation—while preserving robustness to scale and illumination changes.

Box Filters and Hessian Approximations

In the SURF algorithm, box filters serve as efficient integer approximations to the second-order Gaussian derivatives, enabling rapid computation of the Hessian matrix for blob detection. These filters approximate the horizontal second derivative L_{xx}, vertical second derivative L_{yy}, and cross derivative L_{xy} of the Gaussian kernel g(\sigma), denoted respectively as D_{xx}, D_{yy}, and D_{xy}. The D_{xx} filter consists of a central positive rectangular region flanked by two negative regions along the x-direction, mimicking the second derivative's shape; similarly, D_{yy} orients the pattern vertically, while D_{xy} uses diagonally opposing positive and negative quadrants to approximate the mixed partial derivative. The determinant of the approximated Hessian is then computed as \det(H_{\text{approx}}) = D_{xx} D_{yy} - (0.9 D_{xy})^2, where the heuristic factor of 0.9 adjusts for by balancing the relative weights of the responses based on their Frobenius norms, ensuring consistent response strength across orientations. responses are normalized by the mask size to maintain . The sign of the Laplacian of Gaussian, approximated as \text{sign}(D_{xx} + D_{yy}), distinguishes between bright s on dark backgrounds (positive) and dark s on bright backgrounds (negative), aiding in determination. Filter sizes are scale-dependent to simulate a Gaussian scale space: the initial scale uses a 9×9 filter corresponding to an effective standard deviation \sigma \approx 1.2, with subsequent intra-octave sizes increasing to 15×15, 21×21, and 27×27. For higher octaves, sizes effectively double, such as 15×15, 27×27, 39×39, and 51×51 in the second octave, allowing efficient coverage of larger scales without full Gaussian convolution. Responses are evaluated at these scales using integral images, which enable constant-time computation of box filter convolutions via simple summations over rectangular regions, independent of filter size. This approximation avoids costly floating-point Gaussian convolutions, yielding significant speedups: the fast-Hessian detector is over three times faster than the difference-of-Gaussian approach in SIFT, contributing to 's overall performance being approximately three times faster than SIFT for feature extraction on standard benchmarks.

Feature Detection

Scale-Space Extrema Detection

In , the pyramid is constructed to detect blob-like interest points across multiple scales efficiently, without resampling the . typically employs 4 octaves. The pyramid begins with an initial filter size of 9×9 and spans 4 octaves, each containing 2 scales, resulting in a total of 8 discrete scales. This setup employs integer scale increments to prioritize computational speed while approximating Gaussian behavior through box filter responses. The response maps are generated by computing the approximate determinant of the Hessian matrix, denoted as \det(H_{\text{approx}}), at each scale using the precomputed box filter approximations for the second-order Gaussian derivatives. These maps capture potential blob structures, and to achieve sub-pixel accuracy in locating extrema, interpolation is performed between adjacent scales along the scale dimension. This process identifies candidate interest points by finding local maxima or minima in the response maps, leveraging the scale-space structure to ensure invariance to scale changes. Candidate points are refined through non-maximum suppression, where each potential extremum is compared within a 3×3×3 neighborhood spanning the spatial () and scale dimensions. Only points that are strictly greater (for maxima) or lesser (for minima) than all 26 surrounding neighbors are retained as interest points. This step suppresses multiple responses to the same feature, isolating robust -like structures across s. Scale selection for each detected interest point is determined by identifying the scale at which the extremum occurs, promoting scale-invariance by associating the point with the relevant resolution. To eliminate weak or noisy detections, a fixed is applied to the response, set at 600 in the original implementation. Box filters serve as the foundational approximations for these responses, enabling rapid via integral images.

Interest Point Refinement

Following the detection of candidate interest points as scale-space extrema in the Hessian determinant approximation, SURF refines these coarse locations to achieve sub-pixel accuracy in position and scale. This refinement employs a quadratic derived from the second-order expansion of the determinant of the approximated , det(H), expanded around each candidate point. The expansion enables precise by estimating the local maximum of det(H) in the of (x, y, σ), where σ denotes the scale. This approach, adapted from methods in difference-of-Gaussian detectors, ensures that the refined points correspond more accurately to true centers rather than grid-aligned approximations. The location update is performed iteratively using applied to the Taylor approximation in 3D space. Specifically, the shift vector is computed as \xi = - \left[ \frac{\partial^2 \det(H)}{\partial (x,y,\sigma)^2} \right]^{-1} \cdot \left[ \frac{\partial \det(H)}{\partial (x,y,\sigma)} \right], where the 3×3 and gradient of det(H) are approximated using finite differences from neighboring filter responses in the scale pyramid. The position and scale are then updated as (x, y, \sigma) \leftarrow (x, y, \sigma) + \xi. The process typically converges in one or two iterations due to the quadratic nature of the approximation. To ensure reliability, candidate points are rejected if the interpolation results in a shift exceeding 0.5 pixels in the x or y direction, or more than 0.5 in the scale dimension, as such large displacements indicate poor localization or instability in the approximation. This criterion prevents the inclusion of spurious or poorly defined points that may arise from noise or low-contrast regions in the image. Furthermore, an additional filter eliminates edge-like structures, which exhibit high response along one principal curvature but low response along the perpendicular direction, by computing the principal curvature ratio at the refined point. The ratio of the eigenvalues of the 2×2 Hessian matrix H = \begin{bmatrix} L_{xx} & L_{xy} \\ L_{xy} & L_{yy} \end{bmatrix} (filter responses at the point) is assessed via \frac{\operatorname{trace}(H)^2}{\det(H)}. Points are discarded if this exceeds (r + 1)^2 / r with r = 10 (threshold ≈12.1); this corresponds to a maximum eigenvalue ratio of 10, effectively suppressing elongated features while retaining isotropic blobs. This filter, inspired by established Hessian-based criteria, enhances the distinctiveness of the selected interest points by focusing on corner-like or circular responses. SURF's DoH approximation inherently suppresses edges better than SIFT's DoG, but this step provides further robustness. The output of this refinement stage is a set of robust keypoints, each defined by its sub-pixel refined position (x, y), scale σ, and the sign of the Laplacian of Gaussian (LoG) response at that location, which is used later for efficient approximate nearest-neighbor matching. This sign provides a polarity indicator (bright or dark blob) without additional computation cost, contributing to the overall efficiency of SURF.

Feature Description

Orientation Assignment

To achieve rotation invariance, assigns a dominant orientation to each detected keypoint by analyzing responses in a local neighborhood. This process begins with a circular region of radius 6σ centered on the keypoint, where σ denotes the scale at which the keypoint was detected. The region is analyzed using a sliding window approach, with the window of size π/3 shifted in steps of π/12 across the full 360 degrees around the keypoint. Within this neighborhood, horizontal (dx) and vertical (dy) responses are computed using box filters of size 2σ, leveraging images for efficient calculation. For each sub-window, the sums of the responses Σdx and Σdy are aggregated. These responses are weighted by a (with standard deviation 2σ) centered at the keypoint to emphasize contributions near the center and suppress noise from the periphery. The μ for each sub-window is then μ = (Σdx, Σdy), where the components represent the net horizontal and vertical flow. The dominant θ is determined as the angle of the sub-window yielding the μ with the maximum magnitude, computed via θ = \atan2(μ_y, μ_x). A variant known as Upright SURF (U-SURF) omits this assignment step entirely, fixing the orientation to the detector's x-axis. This simplification accelerates processing while sacrificing full rotation invariance, making it suitable for applications like where rotations are limited (e.g., less than 15 degrees) or speed is prioritized over robustness.

Descriptor Vector Construction

The construction of the descriptor vector begins with a square neighborhood of size 20s × 20s centered on the interest point, where s denotes the scale at which the point was detected, and this neighborhood is rotated according to the dominant assigned to the point. This region is divided into a regular 4 × 4 grid of 16 sub-regions, each spanning 5s × 5s, to capture local intensity variations in a structured manner. Within each sub-region, responses are calculated using first-order box s approximating derivatives in the horizontal (dx) and vertical (dy) directions. These s consist of simple +1 and -1 patterns with a support size of 2s, enabling efficient computation via integral images; for instance, the dx filter sums pixels in a column of width 2s on one side and subtracts those on the other. The responses at 25 regularly spaced sample points (step size s) within the sub-region are weighted by a with σ = 3.3s centered on the interest point, emphasizing central contributions for . The summed responses yield four values per sub-region: ∑dx, ∑dy, ∑|dx|, and ∑|dy|, forming a 4D vector that encodes both the overall flow (via signed sums) and magnitude (via absolutes) while the absolute components detect polarity shifts for robustness to monotonic illumination changes. The complete descriptor is obtained by concatenating the 4D vectors from all 16 sub-regions into a 64-dimensional vector. This vector is then normalized to unit norm, dividing each component by the vector's length, which provides invariance to contrast variations across images. A less commonly used extended variant constructs a 128-dimensional descriptor while maintaining the 4 × 4 sub-region grid but enhancing each sub-region's contribution to 8D by splitting the Haar response sums based on the sign of the perpendicular direction—for example, separating ∑dx and ∑|dx| into parts where dy ≥ 0 and dy < 0, and analogously for dy and |dy| split by dx. This doubling of features per sub-region increases distinctiveness for matching at the expense of higher computational cost during comparisons.

Feature Matching

Similarity Measures

In SURF, the primary similarity measure for comparing descriptor vectors between features is the Euclidean distance, computed as the square root of the sum of squared differences (SSD) between corresponding elements of the 64-dimensional vectors. This metric is efficient due to the lower dimensionality of SURF descriptors compared to SIFT's 128-dimensional vectors, enabling faster computation while maintaining robustness to scale and rotation changes. The SSD component specifically quantifies the dissimilarity by summing the squared differences across all 64 elements, providing a straightforward and computationally lightweight approach for initial matching. To further speed up the matching, the sign of the Laplacian (computed during detection) is used as a simple filter: only descriptors with the same Laplacian sign are compared, dramatically decreasing computation time without loss in performance. To establish correspondences, is performed using the chosen , typically via brute-force comparison for small datasets or approximate methods like the Fast Library for Approximate Nearest Neighbors (FLANN) for larger sets to reduce computational overhead. Matches are validated using a : a pair is accepted if the distance to the nearest neighbor is less than 0.7 times the distance to the second nearest neighbor, minimizing false positives. While integral images accelerate descriptor extraction in , the matching process itself remains O(n²) complexity in brute-force mode without acceleration, underscoring the value of approximate indexing techniques for applications.

Outlier Rejection Methods

In feature matching, outlier rejection techniques are essential to filter unreliable correspondences obtained after initial similarity comparisons using on descriptor vectors. These methods enhance the reliability of matches by eliminating ambiguous or inconsistent pairs, thereby improving overall robustness. The , adapted from approach in SIFT, is a primary local filtering method. It discards a putative match if the ratio of the to the nearest neighbor exceeds 0.7 times the distance to the second nearest neighbor, thereby suppressing ambiguous correspondences and boosting matching . This was empirically determined to balance and in SURF evaluations on datasets like the graffiti sequence with viewpoint changes. For global consistency, the (RANSAC) algorithm is commonly applied to the filtered matches to estimate geometric models such as homographies or fundamental matrices. RANSAC iteratively selects random subsets of matches to fit the model, classifying correspondences as inliers if they align within a reprojection error threshold (typically 3 pixels) and rejecting outliers otherwise; this process robustly handles high outlier ratios up to 50% or more. Cross-checking provides an additional layer of verification through bidirectional matching: a correspondence from the first image to the second is retained only if the reverse search yields the same pair, ensuring and further reducing false positives. This is particularly effective in symmetric nearest-neighbor searches and is implemented in standard libraries for matching. Collectively, these outlier rejection strategies significantly lower false positive rates, enabling reliable applications in image alignment.

Applications and Comparisons

Key Applications in Computer Vision

Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF) play a pivotal role in by enabling efficient feature matching for template-based detection, particularly in resource-constrained environments like mobile () applications. In these systems, SURF extracts scale- and rotation-invariant keypoints from query images and matches them against pre-computed templates to identify objects in , supporting overlays of virtual elements onto live camera feeds. For instance, symmetrical variants of SURF have been applied to vehicle make and model recognition, effectively handling symmetric features such as car grilles to achieve robust identification under varying viewpoints. Similarly, SURF facilitates human detection in scenarios by combining feature descriptors with support vector machines (SVM), demonstrating computational efficiency suitable for aerial imagery processing. In , aligns multiple images by detecting and matching corresponding keypoints, which is crucial for tasks like panorama stitching and fusion. By constructing 64- or 128-dimensional descriptors, ensures invariance to illumination and slight distortions, allowing for accurate estimation between images. An adaptive color-enhanced algorithm, for example, improves registration by incorporating RGB channel information for better feature discrimination in colorful images. This makes it particularly effective for fusing multi-modal medical scans, where precise is needed to overlay anatomical structures without artifacts. For , contributes to Structure-from-Motion (SfM) pipelines by providing reliable keypoint matches across multiple views, enabling camera pose estimation through and subsequent 3D point via . These matches support dense scene reconstruction even in challenging conditions, with 's integral image-based computations accelerating the process compared to pixel-wise methods. In SfM applications, handcrafted descriptors have shown superior point localization accuracy over some alternatives, facilitating high-fidelity 3D models from unordered image sets. SURF enables real-time object tracking in video sequences by integrating its features with trackers like the Kanade-Lucas-Tomasi (KLT) method, where keypoints are detected in initial frames and tracked across subsequent ones for continuous object localization. This combination yields higher matching accuracy for dynamic scenes, as seen in intelligent transport systems for car tracking. In , SURF supports (SLAM) by extracting features for monocular , allowing robots to build maps and estimate poses in real-time environments like indoor . Since its integration into the library's non-free module around 2009, has become a staple in implementations, powering applications in and due to its balance of speed and robustness. A notable from the involves SURF-based face recognition using block-based bag-of-visual-words models.

Comparisons with SIFT and Other Detectors

Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF) was designed as an efficient alternative to the (SIFT), offering a favorable between computational speed and detection performance while maintaining and invariance similar to SIFT. Evaluations on standard benchmarks demonstrate that SURF is approximately three times faster than SIFT in feature detection and description, with computation times of around 354 ms for SURF compared to 1036 ms for SIFT on images of 800×640 pixels. Both methods achieve comparable rates, typically in the range of 0.7–0.8 under moderate viewpoint changes of 30–50 degrees, though SURF's performance slightly degrades under severe blur, where SIFT retains higher stability due to its more precise gradient-based descriptors. In comparisons with binary descriptors like () and Binary Robust Invariant Scalable Keypoints (BRISK), SURF exhibits greater robustness to , with higher scores (e.g., steady performance up to 10–30 degrees) owing to its Haar wavelet-based orientation assignment, but it is slower overall for matching tasks. ORB and BRISK, leveraging tests for efficiency, achieve detection-description times of about 0.0385 s and 0.1097 s respectively on typical images, compared to SURF's 0.1806 s, making them preferable for resource-constrained real-time applications despite lower invariance to extreme scale changes beyond 60–150%. SURF's floating-point descriptors provide better distinctiveness than these methods under illumination variations, though ORB offers a stronger speed-accuracy balance in dynamic scenarios. Performance metrics from the Mikolajczyk dataset (also known as the Affine Covariant Regions Dataset) highlight SURF's strengths in speed-accuracy equilibrium for tasks, with rates around 55% under scaling transformations versus SIFT's 60%, and matching scores showing SURF's recall exceeding SIFT by over 10% at equivalent precision levels in sequences like Graffiti and . However, SURF's adoption was historically limited by restrictions, which classified it as non-free in libraries like due to restrictions, which are set to expire in April 2029, prompting developers to favor open alternatives like . Post-2010 variants have addressed these limitations through ; GPU implementations using achieve interactive frame rates up to resolutions, while mobile-optimized versions deliver 6–8× speedups over the original without accuracy loss, enabling integration into systems on embedded platforms. These improvements position accelerated as competitive with deeper learning-based detectors in hybrid pipelines, though it remains less invariant to extreme affine transformations than advanced variants like Affine-SIFT (ASIFT). As of 2025, continues to be applied in areas such as efficient image matching and seismic data processing with improved variants.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features
    In this paper, we present a novel scale- and rotation-invariant interest point detector and descriptor, coined SURF (Speeded Up Ro- bust Features). It ...
  2. [2]
    Is SURF algorithm used in OPENCV patented? edit
    Aug 5, 2013 · The SURF algorithm is not free and is patented. Only two non-free modules, SIFT and SURF, are patented.
  3. [3]
    SURF: Speeded Up Robust Features - SpringerLink
    In this paper, we present a novel scale- and rotation-invariant interest point detector and descriptor, coined SURF (Speeded Up Robust Features).
  4. [4]
    Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF) - ScienceDirect.com
    The paper encompasses a detailed description of the detector and descriptor and then explores the effects of the most important parameters. We conclude the ...Missing: original | Show results with:original
  5. [5]
    Robust interest point detector and descriptor - Google Patents
    For each sub-region, a few descriptor features are calculated at a number ... 2006 Surf: Speeded up robust features. US11189020B2 2021-11-30 Systems and ...
  6. [6]
    https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=Yrd2mwQAAAAJ&citation_for_view=Yrd2mwQAAAAJ:9yKSN-GCB0IC
  7. [7]
    Introduction to SURF (Speeded-Up Robust Features) - OpenCV
    SURF is a speeded-up version of SIFT, introduced in 2006, using Box Filter for scale-space approximation and is 3 times faster than SIFT.Missing: original | Show results with:original
  8. [8]
    [PDF] Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF)
    Sep 10, 2008 · Abstract. This article presents a novel scale- and rotation-invariant detector and descriptor, coined SURF (Speeded-Up Robust Features).
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Fast Matching of Binary Features - UBC Computer Science
    For comparison we use a combination of different features types, both vector features such as SIFT, SURF and NCC. (normalized cross correlation) and binary ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  10. [10]
    Feature Matching - OpenCV
    Feature matching in OpenCV involves matching features between images using methods like Brute-Force and FLANN, which uses distance calculations.
  11. [11]
    Vehicle make and model recognition using symmetrical SURF
    SURF (Speeded Up Robust Features) is a robust and useful feature detector for various vision-based applications but lacks the ability to detect symmetrical ...
  12. [12]
    Human detection using speeded-up robust features and support ...
    This research proposed a Speeded-Up Robust feature selection and SVM for human detection from an aerial image due to computational speed and robustness of the ...
  13. [13]
    Adaptive registration algorithm of color images based on SURF
    ### Summary of SURF in Image Registration from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0263224115000299
  14. [14]
    [2312.15471] Residual Learning for Image Point Descriptors - arXiv
    Dec 24, 2023 · Moreover, handcrafted descriptors such as SIFT and SURF still perform better point localization in Structure-from-Motion (SfM) compared to many ...
  15. [15]
    An Object Tracking System Based on SIFT and SURF Feature ...
    In this paper, we propose an object detection and tracking system which is based on Scale Invariant Feature Transform (SIFT) and Speed Up Robust Features (SURF) ...
  16. [16]
    Parallel and Pipelining design of SLAM Feature Detection Algorithm ...
    A typical feature detection algorithm called Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF) is used in a robot SLAM system with Moving Object Detection (MOD). This paper ...
  17. [17]
    Face Recognition by Using SURF Features with Block-Based Bag of ...
    Oct 21, 2015 · Bag of features has been successfully applied in face recognition. In our research we use SURF features and try to improve it by using block ...Missing: case study smartphone fps
  18. [18]
    [PDF] SIFT and SURF Performance Evaluation Against Various Image ...
    In this paper, we offer a substantive evaluation of SIFT and SURF on several large sets of images and further test each algorithm on typical image ...<|separator|>
  19. [19]
    [PDF] A Comparison of SIFT, PCA-SIFT and SURF - CSC Journals
    From the table and figure, SURF and SIFT have a good repeatability when the viewpoint change is small, but when the viewpoint change is larger than data 1–4, ...Missing: accuracy | Show results with:accuracy
  20. [20]
    (PDF) A comparative analysis of SIFT, SURF, KAZE, AKAZE, ORB ...
    This article presents a comprehensive comparison of SIFT, SURF, KAZE, AKAZE, ORB, and BRISK algorithms. It also elucidates a critical dilemma.
  21. [21]
    http://asrl.utias.utoronto.ca/code/gpusurf/index.html
  22. [22]
    what is the patent status of surf/sift - OpenCV Q&A Forum
    Mar 8, 2025 · The SIFT patent will expire in a few days, and there are efforts to remove it from the "nonfree" section.Is SURF algorithm used in OPENCV patented? editHow can we get license for SURF algorithm to use it in commercial ...More results from answers.opencv.org
  23. [23]
    gpusurf: Speeded Up Speeded Up Robust Features
    Apr 30, 2010 · This is an implementation of the SURF algorithm [1] using the NVIDIA CUDA API [2] and released under a BSD license.Missing: ASURF | Show results with:ASURF
  24. [24]
    Accelerating SURF detector on mobile devices - ACM Digital Library
    Running a SURF (Speeded Up Robust Features) detector on mobile devices remains too slow to support emerging applications such as mobile augmented reality.