Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I would like to get confirmation about a formula. It looks quite simple but I can't make it work, so I start to have some doubt.

Let's say I have 2 images $I_t$ and $I_{t-1}$ which are 2 consecutives video frames. Now, I have for some pixel $p_t(x_0,y_0)$ in $I_t$ a corresponding pixel $p_{t-1}(x'_0,y'_0)$ in the image $I_{t-1}$.

I define a local window as $w^{3D}=w^{2D}_t \cup w^{2D}_{t-1}$ and $w^{2D}_t$ is a $3*3$ window around $p_t$ and $w^{2D}_{t-1}$ is a $3*3$ window around $p_{t-1}$ if there is a corresponding pixel. Otherwise, $w^{3D}=w^{2D}_t \cup \varnothing$.

I want to construct a sparse matrix $L$, size $N*N$ where $N$ is the number of pixels in the image $I_t$.

For each $(i,j)$th element of L, I have :

$L(i,j)=\sum_{k\mid(i,j)\in w^{3D}_k} (...)$ (so if i and j are neighbour in the image or equal)

I have some problems to understand which window is included in the sum. For me, the number of windows that I have to sum is not dependant of $w^{2D}_{t-1}$. I mean it can be $\varnothing$ or not, I still sum the same number of window because $i$ and $j$ are index pixel of $I_t$. Is that correct ?

Is the formula below lead to the same result ?

$L(i,j)=\sum_{k\mid(i,j)\in w^{2D}_k} (...)$

Edit:

If it is not understandable, please let me know, I will refine the question.

share|improve this question
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.