How to refine SLIC Algorithm output [closed]











up vote
-2
down vote

favorite












So I am working on my FYP on SLIC algorithm where I have to implement it on FPGA so at the first stage, I am implementing it on MATLAB. Now I know I can find MATLAB codes online but I have my reasons. Now I have successfully implemented it on MATLAB but the result of inbuilt MATLAB function superixels() is much more refined than my code result. The boundaries are also much smoother. Can anyone guide me on how to refine my superpixels boundaries? Secondly the MATLAB function delivers much finer result than my code. How can I improve this?Thirdly I am using k-means approch where I initially start from square superpixels but the MATLAB command returns arbitrarly shaped superpixels whereas my code returns 99% squares. Is this the reason? If so than what should be the approch?



My code output



MATLAB inbuilt function output






matlab







share|improve this question













closed as off-topic by Wolfie, Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, nkjt, Dev-iL Nov 11 at 8:09


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Questions seeking debugging help ("why isn't this code working?") must include the desired behavior, a specific problem or error and the shortest code necessary to reproduce it in the question itself. Questions without a clear problem statement are not useful to other readers. See: How to create a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example." – Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, Dev-iL

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

















    up vote
    -2
    down vote

    favorite












    So I am working on my FYP on SLIC algorithm where I have to implement it on FPGA so at the first stage, I am implementing it on MATLAB. Now I know I can find MATLAB codes online but I have my reasons. Now I have successfully implemented it on MATLAB but the result of inbuilt MATLAB function superixels() is much more refined than my code result. The boundaries are also much smoother. Can anyone guide me on how to refine my superpixels boundaries? Secondly the MATLAB function delivers much finer result than my code. How can I improve this?Thirdly I am using k-means approch where I initially start from square superpixels but the MATLAB command returns arbitrarly shaped superpixels whereas my code returns 99% squares. Is this the reason? If so than what should be the approch?



    My code output



    MATLAB inbuilt function output






    matlab







    share|improve this question













    closed as off-topic by Wolfie, Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, nkjt, Dev-iL Nov 11 at 8:09


    This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


    • "Questions seeking debugging help ("why isn't this code working?") must include the desired behavior, a specific problem or error and the shortest code necessary to reproduce it in the question itself. Questions without a clear problem statement are not useful to other readers. See: How to create a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example." – Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, Dev-iL

    If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.















      up vote
      -2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      -2
      down vote

      favorite











      So I am working on my FYP on SLIC algorithm where I have to implement it on FPGA so at the first stage, I am implementing it on MATLAB. Now I know I can find MATLAB codes online but I have my reasons. Now I have successfully implemented it on MATLAB but the result of inbuilt MATLAB function superixels() is much more refined than my code result. The boundaries are also much smoother. Can anyone guide me on how to refine my superpixels boundaries? Secondly the MATLAB function delivers much finer result than my code. How can I improve this?Thirdly I am using k-means approch where I initially start from square superpixels but the MATLAB command returns arbitrarly shaped superpixels whereas my code returns 99% squares. Is this the reason? If so than what should be the approch?



      My code output



      MATLAB inbuilt function output






      matlab







      share|improve this question













      So I am working on my FYP on SLIC algorithm where I have to implement it on FPGA so at the first stage, I am implementing it on MATLAB. Now I know I can find MATLAB codes online but I have my reasons. Now I have successfully implemented it on MATLAB but the result of inbuilt MATLAB function superixels() is much more refined than my code result. The boundaries are also much smoother. Can anyone guide me on how to refine my superpixels boundaries? Secondly the MATLAB function delivers much finer result than my code. How can I improve this?Thirdly I am using k-means approch where I initially start from square superpixels but the MATLAB command returns arbitrarly shaped superpixels whereas my code returns 99% squares. Is this the reason? If so than what should be the approch?



      My code output



      MATLAB inbuilt function output






      matlab




      matlab






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Nov 10 at 15:57









      Usman Mani

      11




      11




      closed as off-topic by Wolfie, Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, nkjt, Dev-iL Nov 11 at 8:09


      This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


      • "Questions seeking debugging help ("why isn't this code working?") must include the desired behavior, a specific problem or error and the shortest code necessary to reproduce it in the question itself. Questions without a clear problem statement are not useful to other readers. See: How to create a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example." – Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, Dev-iL

      If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.




      closed as off-topic by Wolfie, Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, nkjt, Dev-iL Nov 11 at 8:09


      This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


      • "Questions seeking debugging help ("why isn't this code working?") must include the desired behavior, a specific problem or error and the shortest code necessary to reproduce it in the question itself. Questions without a clear problem statement are not useful to other readers. See: How to create a Minimal, Complete, and Verifiable example." – Sardar Usama, Luis Mendo, Dev-iL

      If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.





























          active

          oldest

          votes






















          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes

          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          Full-time equivalent

          Image
          Full-time equivalent From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search Full-time equivalent ( FTE ) or whole time equivalent ( WTE ) is a unit that indicates the workload of an employed person (or student) in a way that makes workloads or class loads comparable [1] across various contexts. FTE is often used to measure a worker's or student's involvement in a project, or to track cost reductions in an organization. An FTE of 1.0 is equivalent to a full-time worker or student, while an FTE of 0.5 signals half of a full work or school load. [2] Contents 1 U.S. Federal Government 2 In education 2.1 Example 3 Notes 4 References U.S. Federal Government [ edit ] In the U.S. Federal Government, FTE is defined by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) as the number of total hours worked divided by the maximum number of compensable hours in a full-time schedule as
          Read more

          Bicuculline

          Image
          Bicuculline From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigation Jump to search Bicuculline Clinical data ATC code none Identifiers IUPAC name (6 R )-​6-​[(5 S )-​6-​methyl-​5,​6,​7,​8-​tetrahydro​[1,3]dioxolo​[4,5- g ]​isoquinolin-​5-​yl]​furo[3,4- e ]​[1,3]​benzodioxol-​8(6 H )-​one CAS Number 485-49-4   Y PubChem CID 10237 IUPHAR/BPS 2312 ChemSpider 9820   Y UNII Y37615DVKC ChEBI CHEBI:3092   N ChEMBL ChEMBL417990   N ECHA InfoCard 100.006.927 Chemical and physical data Formula C 20 H 17 N O 6 Molar mass 367.352 g/mol 3D model (JSmol) Interactive image Melting point 215 °C (419 °F) SMILES O=C1O[C@H](c3c1c2OCOc2cc3)[C@@H]5c4cc6OCOc6cc4CCN5C InChI InChI=1S/C20H17NO6/c1-21-5-4-10-6-14-15(25-8-24-14)7-12(10)17(21)18-11-2-3-13-19(26-9-23-13)16(11)20(22)27-18/h2-3,6-7,17-18H,4-5,8-9H2,1H3/t17-,18+/m0/s1   Y Key:IYGYMKDQCDOMRE-ZWKOTPCHSA-N
          Read more

          さくらももこ

          Image
          さくら ももこ 本名 非公開 [1] 生誕 ( 1965-05-08 ) 1965年5月8日 日本・静岡県清水市 （現・静岡市清水区） 死没 ( 2018-08-15 ) 2018年8月15日（53歳没） 日本・東京都目黒区 国籍 日本 職業 漫画家 エッセイスト 作詞家 活動期間 1984年 - 2018年 ジャンル 少女漫画 青年漫画 児童漫画 代表作 『ちびまる子ちゃん』 『コジコジ』 受賞 1989年：第13回講談社漫画賞少女部門 （『ちびまる子ちゃん』） 1990年：第32回日本レコード大賞 （『おどるポンポコリン』作詞） 公式サイト さくらプロダクション テンプレートを表示 さくら ももこ （1965年5月8日 - 2018年8月15日 [2] ）は、日本の漫画家、エッセイスト、作詞家、脚本家。また、自身の少女時代をモデルとした代表作のコミック『ちびまる子ちゃん』の主人公の名前でもある。静岡県清水市（現・静岡市清水区）出身。血液型はA型。身長159cm。一男の母親。 代表作のコミック『ちびまる子ちゃん』の単行本の売上は累計3000万部を超える。また、エッセイストとしても独特の視点と語り口で人気が高く、初期エッセイ集三部作『もものかんづめ』『さるのこしかけ』『たいのおかしら』はいずれもミリオンセラーを記録。 目次 1 経歴 2 人物・交遊関係 3 主な作品 3.1 漫画 3.2 エッセイ 3.3 作詞 3.4 詩集 3.5 雑誌・ムック本 3.6 翻訳 3.7 絵本、ドラマ脚本他 3.8 ラジオ出演 3.9 その他 4 関係人物 4.1 アシスタント 4.2 さくらももこを演じた人物 5 脚注 5.1 注釈 5.2 出典 6 外部リンク 経歴 年譜形式の経歴は推奨されていません 。人物の伝記は流れのあるまとまった文章で記述し、年譜は補助的な使用にとどめてください。 （ 2018年8月 ） 清水市立（当時）入江小学校
          Read more