Talk:Connected-component labeling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Robotics (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Connected-component labeling is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page (Talk), where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


I intend to clean up this article and list a few of the common algorithms (2-pass rasterization for example). Charlie.liban (talk) 18:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Done, and I completely forgot to add a description to the revision. Charlie.liban (talk) 05:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Added an image for clarification. Charlie.liban (talk) 05:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

is the link to a spanish blog post really appropriate in the english article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:41, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. Removed. --Prydeson (talk) 21:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Is it worth adding text about doing connected component labeling in a distributed parallel setting? There are significant scientific challenges to do doing this. SeanAhern (talk) 14:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I would like to see a generalized algorithm for 3 or more dimensional labeling tinku99 —Preceding undated comment added 03:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC).

I'll look into it. Voxel CCL is of interest to biomedical imaging, so you may find some information in papers related to that. -charlie liban (talk) 17:06, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

It is quite hard to understand the pseudo code 'linked[label] = union(linked[label], L).. maby some explanations —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

The whole article is looking a bit cluttered for such a simple concept. I'll try and clarify this with better pseudocode. -charlie liban (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
This could still use some help. It's not clear what the linked sets are used for; they're never read, as near as I can tell. (talk) 04:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

What language is the second source code in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:57, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

MATLAB from the looks of it -charlie liban (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

> The pseudocode for the one-pass algorithm could be improved by linking to the union/find algorithm and by de-matlabing it (bsxfun). The goal should be that people can really understand how it works without running into "magic black box" functions. (talk) 14:33, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Maybe this algorithm should also be mentioned, it uses an entirely different approach, in one sequential scan all components are listed: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

hi, what is the difference between region labeling and segmentation? thanks allot dowi84 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dowi84 (talkcontribs) 16:48, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Here is a possible source for "One component at a time": -- (talk) 13:11, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, I added the "one component at a time" section. I was originally trying to implement the algorithms in this page, but they were very hard to implement and understand. Some time later, while I was reading Vincent and Soille's 1991 paper on Watershed segmentation, I saw that in one of their steps they had used this algorithm. It was fascinatingly easy to implement, fast and most importantly very easy to understand. So I added it here. I should have added the reference at that time. I am sorry for that. I will add it tomorrow. Mohammad Akhlaghi (talk) 14:58, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

The "One-pass version" is (algorithmically) identical to the graph traversal (BFS or DFS). Deleting it would be a first step towards making this article better. (talk) 15:37, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Any particular reason for the "curlab" abbreviation? sounds like a brain fart — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)