Image segmentation evaluation: A survey of unsupervised methods

• Authors: Hui Zhang;Jason E. Fritts;Sally A. Goldman
• Venue: Computer Vision and Image Understanding
• Year: 2008

Image segmentation is an important processing step in many image, video and computer vision applications. Extensive research has been done in creating many different approaches and algorithms for image segmentation, but it is still difficult to assess whether one algorithm produces more accurate segmentations than another, whether it be for a particular image or set of images, or more generally, for a whole class of images. To date, the most common method for evaluating the effectiveness of a segmentation method is subjective evaluation, in which a human visually compares the image segmentation results for separate segmentation algorithms, which is a tedious process and inherently limits the depth of evaluation to a relatively small number of segmentation comparisons over a predetermined set of images. Another common evaluation alternative is supervised evaluation, in which a segmented image is compared against a manually-segmented or pre-processed reference image. Evaluation methods that require user assistance, such as subjective evaluation and supervised evaluation, are infeasible in many vision applications, so unsupervised methods are necessary. Unsupervised evaluation enables the objective comparison of both different segmentation methods and different parameterizations of a single method, without requiring human visual comparisons or comparison with a manually-segmented or pre-processed reference image. Additionally, unsupervised methods generate results for individual images and images whose characteristics may not be known until evaluation time. Unsupervised methods are crucial to real-time segmentation evaluation, and can furthermore enable self-tuning of algorithm parameters based on evaluation results. In this paper, we examine the unsupervised objective evaluation methods that have been proposed in the literature. An extensive evaluation of these methods are presented. The advantages and shortcomings of the underlying design mechanisms in these methods are discussed and analyzed through analytical evaluation and empirical evaluation. Finally, possible future directions for research in unsupervised evaluation are proposed.