report.tex 20 KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401402403404405406407408409410411412413414415416417418419420421422423424425426427428429430431432433434435436437438439440441442443444445446447448449450451452453454455456457
  1. \documentclass[a4paper]{article}
  2. \usepackage{amsmath}
  3. \usepackage{hyperref}
  4. \usepackage{graphicx}
  5. \title{Using local binary patterns to read license plates in photographs}
  6. % Paragraph indentation
  7. \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
  8. \setlength{\parskip}{1ex plus 0.5ex minus 0.2ex}
  9. \begin{document}
  10. \maketitle
  11. \section*{Project members}
  12. Gijs van der Voort\\
  13. Richard Torenvliet\\
  14. Jayke Meijer\\
  15. Tadde\"us Kroes\\
  16. Fabi\'en Tesselaar
  17. \tableofcontents
  18. \pagebreak
  19. \setcounter{secnumdepth}{1}
  20. \section{Problem description}
  21. License plates are used for uniquely identifying motorized vehicles and are
  22. made to be read by humans from great distances and in all kinds of weather
  23. conditions.
  24. Reading license plates with a computer is much more difficult. Our dataset
  25. contains photographs of license plates from various angles and distances. This
  26. means that not only do we have to implement a method to read the actual
  27. characters, but given the location of the license plate and each individual
  28. character, we must make sure we transform each character to a standard form.
  29. This has to be done or else the local binary patterns will never match!
  30. Determining what character we are looking at will be done by using Local Binary
  31. Patterns. The main goal of our research is finding out how effective LBP's are
  32. in classifying characters on a license plate.
  33. In short our program must be able to do the following:
  34. \begin{enumerate}
  35. \item Extracting characters using the location points in the xml file.
  36. \item Reduce noise where possible to ensure maximum readability.
  37. \item Transforming a character to a normal form.
  38. \item Creating a local binary pattern histogram vector.
  39. \item Matching the found vector with a learning set.
  40. \item And finally it has to check results with a real data set.
  41. \end{enumerate}
  42. \section{Language of choice}
  43. The actual purpose of this project is to check if LBP is capable of recognizing
  44. license plate characters. We knew the LBP implementation would be pretty
  45. simple. Thus an advantage had to be its speed compared with other license plate
  46. recognition implementations, but the uncertainty of whether we could get some
  47. results made us pick Python. We felt Python would not restrict us as much in
  48. assigning tasks to each member of the group. In addition, when using the
  49. correct modules to handle images, Python can be decent in speed.
  50. \section{Implementation}
  51. Now we know what our program has to be capable of, we can start with the
  52. implementations.
  53. \subsection{Extracting a letter}
  54. Rewrite this section once we have implemented this properly.
  55. %NO LONGER VALID!
  56. %Because we are already given the locations of the characters, we only need to
  57. %transform those locations using the same perspective transformation used to
  58. %create a front facing license plate. The next step is to transform the
  59. %characters to a normalized manner. The size of the letter W is used as a
  60. %standard to normalize the width of all the characters, because W is the widest
  61. %character of the alphabet. We plan to also normalize the height of characters,
  62. %the best manner for this is still to be determined.
  63. %\begin{enumerate}
  64. % \item Crop the image in such a way that the character precisely fits the
  65. % image.
  66. % \item Scale the image to a standard height.
  67. % \item Extend the image on either the left or right side to a certain width.
  68. %\end{enumerate}
  69. %The resulting image will always have the same size, the character contained
  70. %will always be of the same height, and the character will always be positioned
  71. %at either the left of right side of the image.
  72. \subsection{Transformation}
  73. A simple perspective transformation will be sufficient to transform and resize
  74. the characters to a normalized format. The corner positions of characters in the
  75. dataset are supplied together with the dataset.
  76. \subsection{Reducing noise}
  77. Small amounts of noise will probably be suppressed by usage of a Gaussian
  78. filter. A real problem occurs in very dirty license plates, where branches and
  79. dirt over a letter could radically change the local binary pattern. A question
  80. we can ask ourselves here, is whether we want to concentrate ourselves on these
  81. exceptional cases. By law, license plates have to be readable. However, the
  82. provided dataset showed that this does not means they always are. We will have
  83. to see how the algorithm performs on these plates, however we have good hopes
  84. that our method will get a good score on dirty plates, as long as a big enough
  85. part of the license plate remains readable.
  86. \subsection{Local binary patterns}
  87. Once we have separate digits and characters, we intent to use Local Binary
  88. Patterns (Ojala, Pietikäinen \& Harwood, 1994) to determine what character
  89. or digit we are dealing with. Local Binary
  90. Patterns are a way to classify a texture based on the distribution of edge
  91. directions in the image. Since letters on a license plate consist mainly of
  92. straight lines and simple curves, LBP should be suited to identify these.
  93. \subsubsection{LBP Algorithm}
  94. The LBP algorithm that we implemented is a square variant of LBP, the same
  95. that is introduced by Ojala et al (1994). Wikipedia presents a different
  96. form where the pattern is circular.
  97. \begin{itemize}
  98. \item Determine the size of the square where the local patterns are being
  99. registered. For explanation purposes let the square be 3 x 3. \\
  100. \item The grayscale value of the middle pixel is used as threshold. Every
  101. value of the pixel around the middle pixel is evaluated. If it's value is
  102. greater than the threshold it will be become a one else a zero.
  103. \begin{figure}[h!]
  104. \center
  105. \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{lbp.png}
  106. \caption{LBP 3 x 3 (Pietik\"ainen, Hadid, Zhao \& Ahonen (2011))}
  107. \end{figure}
  108. Notice that the pattern will be come of the form 01001110. This is done when a
  109. the value of the evaluated pixel is greater than the threshold, shift the bit
  110. by the n(with i=i$_{th}$ pixel evaluated, starting with $i=0$).
  111. This results in a mathematical expression:
  112. Let I($x_i, y_i$) an Image with grayscale values and $g_n$ the grayscale value
  113. of the pixel $(x_i, y_i)$. Also let $s(g_i, g_c)$ (see below) with $g_c$ = grayscale value
  114. of the center pixel and $g_i$ the grayscale value of the pixel to be evaluated.
  115. $$
  116. s(g_i, g_c) = \left\{
  117. \begin{array}{l l}
  118. 1 & \quad \text{if $g_i$ $\geq$ $g_c$}\\
  119. 0 & \quad \text{if $g_i$ $<$ $g_c$}\\
  120. \end{array} \right.
  121. $$
  122. $$LBP_{n, g_c = (x_c, y_c)} = \sum\limits_{i=0}^{n-1} s(g_i, g_c)^{2i} $$
  123. The outcome of this operations will be a binary pattern.
  124. \item Given this pattern, the next step is to divide the pattern in cells. The
  125. amount of cells depends on the quality of the result, so trial and error is in
  126. order. Starting with dividing the pattern in to cells of size 16.
  127. \item Compute a histogram for each cell.
  128. \begin{figure}[h!]
  129. \center
  130. \includegraphics[scale=0.7]{cells.png}
  131. \caption{Divide in cells(Pietik\"ainen et all (2011))}
  132. \end{figure}
  133. \item Consider every histogram as a vector element and concatenate these. The
  134. result is a feature vector of the image.
  135. \item Feed these vectors to a support vector machine. This will ''learn'' which
  136. vector indicates what vector is which character.
  137. \end{itemize}
  138. To our knowledge, LBP has yet not been used in this manner before. Therefore,
  139. it will be the first thing to implement, to see if it lives up to the
  140. expectations. When the proof of concept is there, it can be used in a final
  141. program.
  142. Later we will show that taking a histogram over the entire image (basically
  143. working with just one cell) gives us the best results.
  144. \subsection{Matching the database}
  145. Given the LBP of a character, a Support Vector Machine can be used to classify
  146. the character to a character in a learning set. The SVM uses a concatenation
  147. of each cell in an image as a feature vector (in the case we check the entire
  148. image no concatenation has to be done of course. The SVM can be trained with a
  149. subset of the given dataset called the ''Learning set''. Once trained, the
  150. entire classifier can be saved as a Pickle object\footnote{See
  151. \url{http://docs.python.org/library/pickle.html}} for later usage.
  152. \section{Implementation}
  153. In this section we will describe our implementations in more detail, explaining
  154. choices we made.
  155. \subsection{Character retrieval}
  156. In order to retrieve the characters from the entire image, we need to
  157. perform a perspective transformation. However, to do this, we need to know the
  158. coordinates of the four corners of each character. For our dataset, this is
  159. stored in XML files. So, the first step is to read these XML files.
  160. \paragraph*{XML reader}
  161. The XML reader will return a 'license plate' object when given an XML file. The
  162. licence plate holds a list of, up to six, NormalizedImage characters and from
  163. which country the plate is from. The reader is currently assuming the XML file
  164. and image name are corresponding. Since this was the case for the given
  165. dataset. This can easily be adjusted if required.
  166. To parse the XML file, the minidom module is used. So the XML file can be
  167. treated as a tree, where one can search for certain nodes. In each XML
  168. file it is possible that multiple versions exist, so the first thing the reader
  169. will do is retrieve the current and most up-to-date version of the plate. The
  170. reader will only get results from this version.
  171. Now we are only interested in the individual characters so we can skip the
  172. location of the entire license plate. Each character has
  173. a single character value, indicating what someone thought what the letter or
  174. digit was and four coordinates to create a bounding box. To make things not to
  175. complicated a Character class and Point class are used. They
  176. act pretty much as associative lists, but it gives extra freedom on using the
  177. data. If less then four points have been set the character will not be saved.
  178. When four points have been gathered the data from the actual image is being
  179. requested. For each corner a small margin is added (around 3 pixels) so that no
  180. features will be lost and minimum amounts of new features will be introduced by
  181. noise in the margin.
  182. In the next section you can read more about the perspective transformation that
  183. is being done. After the transformation the character can be saved: Converted
  184. to grayscale, but nothing further. This was used to create a learning set. If
  185. it doesn't need to be saved as an actual image it will be converted to a
  186. NormalizedImage. When these actions have been completed for each character the
  187. license plate is usable in the rest of the code.
  188. \paragraph*{Perspective transformation}
  189. Once we retrieved the cornerpoints of the character, we feed those to a
  190. module that extracts the (warped) character from the original image, and
  191. creates a new image where the character is cut out, and is transformed to a
  192. rectangle.
  193. \subsection{Noise reduction}
  194. The image contains a lot of noise, both from camera errors due to dark noise
  195. etc., as from dirt on the license plate. In this case, noise therefore means
  196. any unwanted difference in color from the surrounding pixels.
  197. \paragraph*{Camera noise and small amounts of dirt}
  198. The dirt on the license plate can be of different sizes. We can reduce the
  199. smaller amounts of dirt in the same way as we reduce normal noise, by applying
  200. a Gaussian blur to the image. This is the next step in our program.\\
  201. \\
  202. The Gaussian filter we use comes from the \texttt{scipy.ndimage} module. We use
  203. this function instead of our own function, because the standard functions are
  204. most likely more optimized then our own implementation, and speed is an
  205. important factor in this application.
  206. \paragraph*{Larger amounts of dirt}
  207. Larger amounts of dirt are not going to be resolved by using a Gaussian filter.
  208. We rely on one of the characteristics of the Local Binary Pattern, only looking
  209. at the difference between two pixels, to take care of these problems.\\
  210. Because there will probably always be a difference between the characters and
  211. the dirt, and the fact that the characters are very black, the shape of the
  212. characters will still be conserved in the LBP, even if there is dirt
  213. surrounding the character.
  214. \subsection{Creating Local Binary Patterns and feature vector}
  215. Every pixel is a center pixel and it is also a value to evaluate but not at the
  216. same time. Every pixel is evaluated as shown in the explanation
  217. of the LBP algorithm. The 8 neighbours around that pixel are evaluated, of course
  218. this area can be bigger, but looking at the closes neighbours can give us more
  219. information about the patterns of a character than looking at neighbours
  220. further away. This form is the generic form of LBP, no interpolation is needed
  221. the pixels adressed as neighbours are indeed pixels.
  222. Take an example where the
  223. full square can be evaluated, there are cases where the neighbours are out of
  224. bounds. The first to be checked is the pixel in the left
  225. bottom corner in the square 3 x 3, with coordinate $(x - 1, y - 1)$ with $g_c$
  226. as center pixel that has coordinates $(x, y)$. If the grayscale value of the
  227. neighbour in the left corner is greater than the grayscale
  228. value of the center pixel than return true. Bitshift the first bit with 7. The
  229. outcome is now 1000000. The second neighbour will be bitshifted with 6, and so
  230. on. Until we are at 0. The result is a binary pattern of the local point just
  231. evaluated.
  232. Now only the edge pixels are a problem, but a simpel check if the location of
  233. the neighbour is still in the image can resolve this. We simply return false if
  234. it is.
  235. \subsection{Classification}
  236. \section{Finding parameters}
  237. Now that we have a functioning system, we need to tune it to work properly for
  238. license plates. This means we need to find the parameters. Throughout the
  239. program we have a number of parameters for which no standard choice is
  240. available. These parameters are:\\
  241. \\
  242. \begin{tabular}{l|l}
  243. Parameter & Description\\
  244. \hline
  245. $\sigma$ & The size of the Gaussian blur.\\
  246. \emph{cell size} & The size of a cell for which a histogram of LBPs will
  247. be generated.\\
  248. $\gamma$ & Parameter for the Radial kernel used in the SVM.\\
  249. $c$ & The soft margin of the SVM. Allows how much training
  250. errors are accepted.
  251. \end{tabular}\\
  252. \\
  253. For each of these parameters, we will describe how we searched for a good
  254. value, and what value we decided on.
  255. \subsection{Parameter $\sigma$}
  256. The first parameter to decide on, is the $\sigma$ used in the Gaussian blur. To
  257. find this parameter, we tested a few values, by checking visually what value
  258. removed most noise out of the image, while keeping the edges sharp enough to
  259. work with. It turned out the best value is $\sigma = 0.5$.
  260. \subsection{Parameter \emph{cell size}}
  261. The cell size of the Local Binary Patterns determines over what region a
  262. histogram is made. The trade-off here is that a bigger cell size makes the
  263. classification less affected by relative movement of a character compared to
  264. those in the learning set, since the important structure will be more likely to
  265. remain in the same cell. However, if the cell size is too big, there will not
  266. be enough cells to properly describe the different areas of the character, and
  267. the feature vectors will not have enough elements.\\
  268. \\
  269. In order to find this parameter, we used a trial-and-error technique on a few
  270. cell sizes. During this testing, we discovered that a lot better score was
  271. reached when we take the histogram over the entire image, so with a single
  272. cell. therefor, we decided to work without cells.
  273. \subsection{Parameters $\gamma$ \& $c$}
  274. The parameters $\gamma$ and $c$ are used for the SVM. $c$ is a standard
  275. parameter for each type of SVM, called the 'soft margin'. This indicates how
  276. exact each element in the learning set should be taken. A large soft margin
  277. means that an element in the learning set that accidentally has a completely
  278. different feature vector than expected, due to noise for example, is not taken
  279. into account. If the soft margin is very small, then almost all vectors will be
  280. taken into account, unless they differ extreme amounts.\\
  281. $\gamma$ is a variable that determines the size of the radial kernel, and as
  282. such blablabla.\\
  283. \\
  284. Since these parameters both influence the SVM, we need to find the best
  285. combination of values. To do this, we perform a so-called grid-search. A
  286. grid-search takes exponentially growing sequences for each parameter, and
  287. checks for each combination of values what the score is. The combination with
  288. the highest score is then used as our parameters, and the entire SVM will be
  289. trained using those parameters.\\
  290. \\
  291. We found that the best values for these parameters are $c = ?$ and
  292. $\gamma = ?$.
  293. \section{Results}
  294. The goal was to find out two things with this research: The speed of the
  295. classification and the accuracy. In this section we will show our findings.
  296. \subsection{Speed}
  297. Recognizing license plates is something that has to be done fast, since there
  298. can be a lot of cars passing a camera in a short time, especially on a highway.
  299. Therefore, we measured how well our program performed in terms of speed. We
  300. measure the time used to classify a license plate, not the training of the
  301. dataset, since that can be done offline, and speed is not a primary necessity
  302. there.\\
  303. \\
  304. The speed of a classification turned out to be blablabla.
  305. \subsection{Accuracy}
  306. Of course, it is vital that the recognition of a license plate is correct,
  307. almost correct is not good enough here. Therefore, we have to get the highest
  308. accuracy score we possibly can.\\
  309. \\ According to Wikipedia
  310. \footnote{
  311. \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_number_plate_recognition}},
  312. commercial license plate recognition software score about $90\%$ to $94\%$,
  313. under optimal conditions and with modern equipment. Our program scores an
  314. average of blablabla.
  315. \section{Difficulties}
  316. During the implementation and testing of the program, we did encounter a
  317. number of difficulties. In this section we will state what these difficulties
  318. were and whether we were able to find a proper solution for them.
  319. \subsection*{Dataset}
  320. We did experience a number of problems with the provided dataset. A number of
  321. these are problems to be expected in a real world problem, but which make
  322. development harder. Others are more elemental problems.\\
  323. The first problem was that the dataset contains a lot of license plates which
  324. are problematic to read, due to excessive amounts of dirt on them. Of course,
  325. this is something you would encounter in the real situation, but it made it
  326. hard for us to see whether there was a coding error or just a bad example.\\
  327. Another problem was that there were license plates of several countries in
  328. the dataset. Each of these countries has it own font, which also makes it
  329. hard to identify these plates, unless there are a lot of these plates in the
  330. learning set.\\
  331. A problem that is more elemental is that some of the characters in the dataset
  332. are not properly classified. This is of course very problematic, both for
  333. training the SVM as for checking the performance. This meant we had to check
  334. each character whether its description was correct.
  335. \subsection*{SVM}
  336. We also had trouble with the SVM for Python. The standard Python SVM, libsvm,
  337. had a poor documentation. There was no explanation what so ever on which
  338. parameter had to be what. This made it a lot harder for us to see what went
  339. wrong in the program.
  340. \section{Workload distribution}
  341. The first two weeks were team based. Basically the LBP algorithm could be
  342. implemented in the first hour, while some talked and someone did the typing.
  343. Some additional 'basics' where created in similar fashion. This ensured that
  344. every team member was up-to-date and could start figuring out which part of the
  345. implementation was most suited to be done by one individually or in a pair.
  346. \subsection{Who did what}
  347. Gijs created the basic classes we could use and helped the rest everyone by
  348. keeping track of what required to be finished and whom was working on what.
  349. Tadde\"us and Jayke were mostly working on the SVM and all kinds of tests
  350. whether the histograms were matching and alike. Fabi\"en created the functions
  351. to read and parse the given xml files with information about the license
  352. plates. Upon completion all kinds of learning and data sets could be created.
  353. %Richard je moet even toevoegen wat je hebt gedaan :P:P
  354. %maar miss is dit hele ding wel overbodig Ik dacht dat Rein het zei tijdens
  355. %gesprek van ik wil weten hoe het ging enzo.
  356. \subsection{How it went}
  357. Sometimes one cannot hear the alarm bell and wake up properly. This however was
  358. not a big problem as no one was affraid of staying at Science Park a bit longer
  359. to help out. Further communication usually went through e-mails and replies
  360. were instantaneous! A crew to remember.
  361. \section{Conclusion}
  362. Awesome
  363. \end{document}