81:
53:
282:
that you can't use the invention in the US; they may also have pending or issued foreign patents. Or they may have let the patent lapse. Or it may be invalid for any of a number of reasons. Or the claims may not apply to the exact algorithm or application that you have. Amateurs like wikipedia writers shouldn't be in the position of trying to assess these things. In the current case, the statement of patent is sourced to some guy's web page, so you don't even know what patent is being referred to.
141:
67:
22:
374:
You might be right, but not all
Knowledge writers are amateurs. Maybe there are patent lawyers out there who have the time ($ deity forbid!) to edit such articles and provide the necessary details. Besides, providing information that there is some form of valid IP claim on it would be a good idea, at
606:
I just read through the article in its entirety for the first time on mobile (where the TOC doesn't show), and found it rather hard to follow. The "Key Stages" section seems to dive into way too much detail for an overview, and is confusing when it is presented before a description of the keypoints
487:
I've noticed that searching for AutoPano Pro or AutoPano redirect to this page, but I'm not sure why and I don't think that they should. Unless someone objects I'm going to have a go at creating a page for the AutoPano Pro software product (bear in mind that I am a new user). At the very least it
281:
Generally speaking, it's a bad idea for wikipedia to try to summarize the intellectual property status of ideas. Yes, it has been widely discussed that David Lowe's university got a U.S. Patent based on his work. If you want to know what that means, you need to consult an attorney. It may mean
393:
Please note that in any case, the patent is not valid outside of the US - the US being the only country crazy/stupid enough to allow for the patenting of algorithms. Meanwhile, the rest of the world actually has some common sense and you're free to use SURF as much as you like.
300:
While Lowe's work on object recognition is a very valuable contribution to the field of computer vision, a number the ideas and methods used in his work on the SIFT descriptor have also been used by others before his publications or what I would assume his patent application.
467:
Many recent computer vision papers and applications use the SIFT keypoint descriptor without using the other elements in the SIFT framework (e.g. feature point detection, matching method). This section therefore should be more emphasized and described in more details.
323:
And that's why it takes a skilled attorney and an expert in the art to go over the claims together and try to figure out what you might or might not want to do if you're worried about infringement. It would be best if wikipedia were silent on all this, in my opinion.
194:
I was just wondering if it would be at all possible to have the meanings of the mathematical symbols referenced as well. For someone who is doing research and attempting to learn what all this means it would be extremely helpful.
445:
The descriptor is vaguely explained. Lowe's original feature vector is 160-dimensional, not 128. It uses histograms on two adjacent levels in the image pyramid. Clarifications are badly needed, but I'm not a native...
265:
What does it mean that the algorithm is patented? You can't use it in a commercial product? How long will that last? Is this controversial? I'd like to see a section in the article that gives details about this.
559:
Article claims "...are easy to match against a (large) database of local features" without a source, even though 128 dimensions are hard to handle for datastructures like kd-trees. I'm new to wikipedia, but just
527:
The difference between D( x, y, σ) and D in the section 'Interpolation of nearby data for accurate position' is completely unclear to me. I think the article would benefit from an explanation of this.
236:
There's no theoretical reason for it to be precisely 0.03. It's there just to filter out features resulting from noise. IMO if you have good data, you could use lower (less restrictive) value.
503:
I agree there should not be a mere redirect. At least a stub: "AutoPano is a panoramic stitching software using SIFT". You may want to look at the page describing another related software:
167:
As this page is directly about SIFT, descriptions of GLOH and SURF should be moved to seperate pages. Only brief mentions and links to GLOH & SIFT should be included on this page.
607:
or descriptors. I suggest the article would be improved if this section was dramatically reduced, and the current contents moved into the algorithm section.
671:
507:. If SIFT is a significant technology behind AutoPano, I think it's appropriate to link to it from the SIFT article (there is already a link to AutoStitch).
666:
131:
121:
676:
583:
453:
431:
469:
401:
243:
97:
661:
528:
488:
seems like the redirect from AutoPano Pro to this page should be removed, as this page makes no mention to the software product. --
182:
88:
58:
350:
It may require a very good expert or even require more than one expert to give an appropriate description of prior art ...
33:
579:
271:
457:
435:
473:
405:
532:
247:
267:
39:
200:
80:
52:
568:
449:
427:
397:
239:
170:
489:
21:
508:
493:
380:
196:
96:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
591:
512:
329:
287:
178:
647:
616:
595:
572:
536:
516:
497:
477:
461:
439:
409:
384:
359:
333:
310:
291:
275:
251:
228:
204:
351:
302:
643:
612:
564:
224:
376:
655:
632:...in the sense of achieving higher efficiency scores and lower 1-precision scores...
587:
375:
least it would make sure people are aware they should check first before using this.
355:
325:
306:
283:
174:
66:
639:
608:
504:
219:
This page would really benefit from an explanation why this value is chosen.--
140:
220:
635:
93:
578:
Yes, please do work on it. Some good sources about how to use
423:"This step is image closest in scale to the keypoint's scale."
15:
148:
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.
139:
92:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
421:What's the meaning of the following sentence?
602:Organization: Move Key Stages out of overview?
190:Clarification of Mathematic Variable Meanings
8:
168:
47:
547:Refs - large amounts of text have no refs
49:
19:
7:
86:This article is within the scope of
672:Robotics articles needing attention
38:It is of interest to the following
14:
550:Content - are all topics covered?
667:Mid-importance Robotics articles
79:
65:
51:
20:
553:Prose and MoS compliance checks
126:This article has been rated as
106:Knowledge:WikiProject Robotics
1:
677:WikiProject Robotics articles
440:07:48, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
417:Section "Keypoint descriptor"
252:12:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
109:Template:WikiProject Robotics
100:and see a list of open tasks.
648:11:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
537:13:18, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
517:17:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
498:06:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
462:06:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
360:16:36, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
334:01:57, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
229:21:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
205:11:03, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
622:what is "1-precision score"
617:17:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
483:Autopano (Software product)
410:05:53, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
311:13:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
292:05:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
276:05:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
185:) 07:39, 2007 July 20 (UTC)
693:
580:locality-sensitive hashing
478:14:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
132:project's importance scale
662:C-Class Robotics articles
596:00:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
573:02:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
385:06:36, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
147:
125:
74:
46:
144:
28:This article is rated
163:Article is about SIFT
143:
556:Assess on B criteria
89:WikiProject Robotics
628:1-precision scores
145:
34:content assessment
523:D( x, y, σ) and D
452:comment added by
430:comment added by
400:comment added by
242:comment added by
186:
173:comment added by
160:
159:
156:
155:
152:
151:
112:Robotics articles
684:
542:Attention needed
464:
442:
412:
254:
114:
113:
110:
107:
104:
83:
76:
75:
70:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
692:
691:
687:
686:
685:
683:
682:
681:
652:
651:
624:
604:
544:
525:
485:
454:213.216.251.200
447:
425:
419:
395:
268:Singularitarian
263:
237:
217:
212:
192:
165:
111:
108:
105:
102:
101:
64:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
690:
688:
680:
679:
674:
669:
664:
654:
653:
623:
620:
603:
600:
599:
598:
582:with SIFT are
562:
561:
557:
554:
551:
548:
543:
540:
524:
521:
520:
519:
484:
481:
432:129.27.201.116
418:
415:
414:
413:
390:
389:
388:
387:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
316:
315:
314:
313:
295:
294:
262:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
216:
213:
211:
208:
191:
188:
164:
161:
158:
157:
154:
153:
150:
149:
146:
136:
135:
128:Mid-importance
124:
118:
117:
115:
98:the discussion
84:
72:
71:
62:Mid‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
689:
678:
675:
673:
670:
668:
665:
663:
660:
659:
657:
650:
649:
645:
641:
637:
633:
629:
621:
619:
618:
614:
610:
601:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
577:
576:
575:
574:
570:
566:
558:
555:
552:
549:
546:
545:
541:
539:
538:
534:
530:
522:
518:
514:
510:
506:
502:
501:
500:
499:
495:
491:
482:
480:
479:
475:
471:
470:84.228.61.242
465:
463:
459:
455:
451:
443:
441:
437:
433:
429:
424:
416:
411:
407:
403:
402:93.182.169.21
399:
392:
391:
386:
382:
378:
373:
372:
371:
370:
361:
357:
353:
349:
348:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
335:
331:
327:
322:
321:
320:
319:
318:
317:
312:
308:
304:
299:
298:
297:
296:
293:
289:
285:
280:
279:
278:
277:
273:
269:
260:
253:
249:
245:
244:195.113.20.80
241:
235:
234:
233:
232:
231:
230:
226:
222:
214:
209:
207:
206:
202:
198:
189:
187:
184:
180:
176:
172:
162:
142:
138:
137:
133:
129:
123:
120:
119:
116:
99:
95:
91:
90:
85:
82:
78:
77:
73:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
631:
630:in fragment
627:
625:
605:
563:
529:82.95.224.82
526:
486:
466:
444:
422:
420:
396:— Preceding
264:
218:
210:Image Needed
193:
169:— Preceding
166:
127:
87:
40:WikiProjects
448:—Preceding
426:—Preceding
238:—Preceding
656:Categories
565:Chaosdruid
560:wondering.
505:AutoStitch
490:Kragen2uk
377:Icedwater
261:Patented?
215:Why 0.03?
636:F1 score
634:? Is it
626:What is
588:Dicklyon
509:Akinoame
450:unsigned
428:unsigned
398:unsigned
326:Dicklyon
284:Dicklyon
240:unsigned
183:contribs
175:Redgecko
171:unsigned
103:Robotics
94:Robotics
59:Robotics
197:JRSofty
130:on the
30:C-class
640:Jumpow
36:scale.
609:Leopd
644:talk
613:talk
592:talk
584:here
569:talk
533:talk
513:talk
494:talk
474:talk
458:talk
436:talk
406:talk
381:talk
356:talk
330:talk
307:talk
288:talk
272:talk
248:talk
225:talk
201:talk
179:talk
586:.
352:Tpl
303:Tpl
122:Mid
658::
646:)
638:?
615:)
594:)
571:)
535:)
515:)
496:)
476:)
460:)
438:)
408:)
383:)
358:)
332:)
309:)
290:)
274:)
266:--
250:)
227:)
221:bb
203:)
181:•
642:(
611:(
590:(
567:(
531:(
511:(
492:(
472:(
456:(
434:(
404:(
379:(
354:(
328:(
305:(
286:(
270:(
246:(
223:(
199:(
177:(
134:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
