4.5 Article

Equivalence of digital image correlation criteria for pattern matching

Journal

APPLIED OPTICS
Volume 49, Issue 28, Pages 5501-5509

Publisher

Optica Publishing Group
DOI: 10.1364/AO.49.005501

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [11002012]
  2. State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy [KF10041]
  3. Directorate For Engineering
  4. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn [0825806] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In digital image correlation (DIC), to obtain the displacements of each point of interest, a correlation criterion must be predefined to evaluate the similarity between the reference subset and the target subset. The correlation criterion is of fundamental importance in DIC, and various correlation criteria have been designed and used in literature. However, little research has been carried out to investigate their relations. In this paper, we first provide a comprehensive overview of various correlation criteria used in DIC. Then we focus on three robust and most widely used correlation criteria, i.e., a zero-mean normalized cross-correlation (ZNCC) criterion, a zero-mean normalized sum of squared difference (ZNSSD) criterion, and a parametric sum of squared difference (PSSDab) criterion with two additional unknown parameters, since they are insensitive to the scale and offset changes of the target subset intensity and have been highly recommended for practical use in literature. The three correlation criteria are analyzed to establish their transversal relationships, and the theoretical analyses clearly indicate that the three correlation criteria are actually equivalent, which elegantly unifies these correlation criteria for pattern matching. Finally, the equivalence of these correlation criteria is further validated by numerical simulation and actual experiment. (C) 2010 Optical Society of America

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available