Author Affiliations
1School of Mechanical Engineering, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214122, China2Jiangsu Key Laboratory of Advanced Food Manufacturing Equipment & Technology, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214122, China;3School of Internet of Things Engineering, Jiangnan University, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214122, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Relation between the base number R(x, y) and the index γ in Gamma function
Fig. 2. Comparison of two stretching methods
Fig. 3. Comparison of the enhancement effect for scratch 1. (a) SSR; (b) algorithm in Ref.[4]; (c) CLAHE; (d) our algorithm
Fig. 4. Comparison of the enhancement effect for scratch 2. (a) SSR; (b) algorithm in Ref.[4]; (c) CLAHE; (d) our algorithm
Fig. 5. Comparison of the enhancement effect for scratch 3. (a) SSR; (b) algorithm in Ref.[4]; (c) CLAHE; (d) our algorithm
Fig. 6. Comparison of the enhancement effect for crease 1. (a) SSR; (b) algorithm in Ref.[4]; (c) CLAHE; (d) our algorithm
Fig. 7. Comparison of the enhancement effect for crease 2. (a) SSR; (b) algorithm in Ref.[4]; (c) CLAHE; (d) our algorithm
Fig. 8. Marked results graphs. (a) Defect enhancement image; (b) gradient image; (c) marked image
Fig. 9. Segmentation results of OTSU. (a) Fig. 3; (b) Fig. 4; (c) Fig. 5; (d) Fig. 6; (e) Fig. 7
Fig. 10. Segmentation results of our algorithm. (a) Fig. 3; (b) Fig. 4; (c) Fig. 5; (d) Fig. 6; (e) Fig. 7
Algorithm | Fig.3 | Fig.4 | Fig.5 | Fig.6 | Fig.7 |
---|
SSR | 0.012 | 0.022 | 0.029 | 0.070 | 0.052 | Algorithm in Ref.[4] | 0.135 | 0.066 | 0.103 | 0.114 | 0.011 | CLAHE | 0.008 | 0.016 | 0.022 | 0.057 | 0.044 | Our algorithm | 0.019 | 0.040 | 0.040 | 0.083 | 0.084 | Original image | 0.007 | 0.014 | 0.019 | 0.043 | 0.027 |
|
Table 1. Comparison results of contrast of different algorithms
Algorithm | Fig.3 | Fig.4 | Fig.5 | Fig.6 | Fig.7 |
---|
SSR | 0.036 | 0.177 | 0.154 | 1.075 | 0.433 | Algorithm in Ref.[4] | 1.344 | 0.178 | 0.097 | 1.058 | 0.398 | CLAHE | 0.040 | 0.178 | 0.250 | 1.036 | 0.471 | Our algorithm | 0.042 | 0.195 | 0.197 | 1.291 | 0.541 | Original image | 0.034 | 0.154 | 0.154 | 0.865 | 0.358 |
|
Table 2. Comparison results of information entropy of different algorithms
Algorithm | Fig.3 | Fig.4 | Fig.5 | Fig.6 | Fig.7 |
---|
SSR | 0.319 | 0.301 | 0.309 | 0.308 | 0.493 | Algorithm in Ref.[4] | 6.325 | 8.138 | 9.074 | 10.236 | 10.334 | CLAHE | 0.313 | 0.293 | 0.250 | 0.259 | 0.303 | Our algorithm | 0.396 | 0.378 | 0.378 | 0.440 | 0.487 |
|
Table 3. Comparison of time-consuming of different algorithms unit: s