4.7 Article

Self-similarities in optical flows Voxel lumens flux fractality in moving shapes in triangulated video frames

Journal

CHAOS SOLITONS & FRACTALS
Volume 164, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112722

Keywords

Divergence; Fractality; Self-similarity; Triangle cluster; Video frame; Voxel lumens flux

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences & Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) [185986]
  2. Instituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica (INdAM) Francesco Severi, Italy
  3. Gruppo Nazionale per le Strutture Algebriche, Italy
  4. Geometriche e Loro Applicazioni, Italy [9 920160 000362, U 2016/000036]
  5. Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) Scientific Human Resources Development, Turkey (BIDEB) [2221-1059B211301223]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper introduces the self-similarity of the minuscule positive and negative lumens flux of voxels in dominant moving objects in video frames and analyzes the self-similarity of voxel lumens flux and the fractal nature of maximal nucleus triangle clusters in triangulated video frames.
This paper introduces self-similarity inherent in the minuscule positive and negative lumens flux (lx) of voxels in dominant moving objects in the foreground of triangulated video frames. A voxel is a volume picture element in a video frame with coordinates that include an elapsed time component as well as the usual horizontal and vertical components. Persistent voxel self-similarities can be seen in the divergence of triangulated video frame voxel (lx) (spread of luminous brightness levels). The main results introduced in this paper include (1) inherent self-similarity in triangle clusters covering moving objects in the foreground of video frames, (2) self-similarities in voxel lumens flux in maximal nucleus triangle clusters (MNC), and (3) every triangulated video frame MNC is a fractal.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available