Local Radon Descriptors for Image Search
Morteza Babaie1 , H.R. Tizhoosh2 Amin Khatami3 and M.E. Shiri1

arXiv:1710.04097v1 [cs.CV] 11 Oct 2017

1 Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
2 KIMIA Lab, University of Waterloo, ON, CANADA
3 Institute for Intelligent Systems Research and Innovation (IISRI), Deakin University, Australia

Abstract— Radon transform and its inverse operation are
important techniques in medical imaging tasks. Recently, there
has been renewed interest in Radon transform for applications
such as content-based medical image retrieval. However, all
studies so far have used Radon transform as a global or quasiglobal image descriptor by extracting projections of the whole
image or large sub-images. This paper attempts to show that
the dense sampling to generate the histogram of local Radon
projections has a much higher discrimination capability than the
global one. In this paper, we introduce Local Radon Descriptor
(LRD) and apply it to the IRMA dataset, which contains 14,410 xray images as well as to the INRIA Holidays dataset with 1,990
images. Our results show significant improvement in retrieval
performance by using LRD versus its global version. We also
demonstrate that LRD can deliver results comparable to wellestablished descriptors like LBP and HOG.
Keywords— Image retrieval; image descriptor; Radon projections; local projections; IRMA dataset;

extensions of the LBP by incorporating a different number
of neighbors [9] and different number of histogram bins [10].
Uniform LBP reduces the number of bins from 256 to 59 by
a selective grouping of patterns. LBP has been successfully
applied in various applications such as face detection [11] and
object detection [12]. It also has been used for medical image
retrieval in several reports [13]–[15].
The HOG descriptor, on the other hand, captures the gradient information in densely sampled local windows by counting
the number of discrete directions in n bins. It was initially
introduced for pedestrian detection [16]. However, its power
of discrimination made it applicable to a variety of fields in
computer vision such as face recognition and image retrieval
[17], [18].

I. M OTIVATION

Radon transform integrates projection values from various
directions in order to reconstruct an object (or the human body)
from its parallel projections [19]. The inverse Radon transform
along with filtered backprojection has been used to create body
images from projections captured at different directions [20].
Given the spatial intensities f (x, y), the Radon transform can
be given as

Content-Based Image Retrieval (CBIR) refers to a class of
algorithms that use the image content (pixels or more commonly their features) to search for similar images in an archive
when a query (input) image is given by the user. Numerous
CBIR methods have been introduced that are based on feature
descriptors [1]–[3]. Generally, we can distinguish between
feature descriptors that are either based on “dense sampling”
(features calculated from many small image windows with
overlap), or feature descriptors that are based on “keypoint
detection” (features calculated from small windows around
selected points). One may add a third type based on global
image features (FFT spectral features, Radon projections etc.)
[4], [5]. The former two types of descriptors, however, have
been more widely used and reported in literature.
Local binary patterns (LBP) and the histogram of gradients
(HOG) and their extensions are representative for successful
methods, which extract local information from images by
means of dense sampling. Feature extraction methods such as
SIFT and SURF have been commonly used as well. They are
based on keypoint detection scheme which may fail to detect
reliable keypoints in medical images [6], [7]. Dense sampling
methods, in contrast, deliver reportedly higher performance
[6].
The LBP generally captures the difference between each
pixel and its neighbouring pixels (i.e., 8 pixels) as a binary
vector which is then converted to decimal integers that are
counted to construct a histogram [8]. There are numerous

II. R ADON T RANSFROM

R(ρ, θ) =

+∞ Z
+∞
Z
f (x, y)δ(ρ − xcosθ − ysinθ)dxdy, (1)
−∞ −∞

where δ(·) is the Dirac delta function. In Figure 1, the Radon
transform is illustrated for a small window. The Radon transform of a sample image (its sinogram containing projections
in 180 directions) is depicted as well.

Fig. 1. Left: Three Radon projections of a 4 × 4 sample window at 0◦ , 45◦
and 90◦ with zero padding. Right: a sample x-ray image and its sinogram
(180 Radon projections).

To appear in proceedings of the 7th Intern. Conf. on Image Processing Theory, Tools and Applications (IPTA 2017), Nov 28-Dec 1, Montreal, Canada.

Step 4. Selecting two derivative vectors dθ and dθ+α , a
ratio vector r is created by dividing the elements of both
gradient vectors resulting in a vector in (−∞, +∞):

Several works have recently developed approaches to medical image retrieval using “Radon barcodes” in which they
binarize a certain number of equidistant projections [5], [21],
[22]. We find the idea of using projections quite intriguing,
specially for the medical field. However, the literature only
contains projections-based descriptors that use “global” information (Radon projections of the entire image). Of course, the
performance of such methods, restricted to global information,
is expectedly rather limited.
There have been several works that use the term “local
Radon transform” in connection with grayscale images (and
not binary ones). However, they generally mean “localized”
application of Radon transform on a certain part of the image
or a sub-image [23], [24].
In this paper, we introduce a new dense-sampling descriptor
based on Radon transform named Local Radon Descriptor
(LRD). We describe the details of LRD in the next section.
We use two image datasets to validate the proposed approach
against LBP and HOG although our primary agenda is to
improve methods which have used “global” Radon projections
to assemble compact descriptors. LRD is supposed to break
through the limitations of globally captured projections by
examining gradient change of locally extracted projections.

r(i) =

s(i) = |dθ (i) + dθ+α (i)|

Figure 2 shows the steps for creating a histogram hk for a
sub-image.
IV. E XPERIMENTS
We conducted two different experiments to evaluate the
LRD versus the global Radon descriptors. The first experiment
was conducted on the IRMA dataset, and the second one
uses the INRIA Holidays dataset. In the following, we briefly
describe these datasets and then the results of LRD for
retrieving images from these datasets will be reported. The
Matlab code for LRD is available on our website1 .
A. Datasets
IRMA dataset – The Image Retrieval in Medical Applications (IRMA) dataset, created by the Aachen University
of Technology, has been used to evaluate retrieval methods
for medical CBIR tasks [25]. It contains 12,677 images in
the training set and 1,733 images in the testing set. The
IRMA dataset is extremely challenging mainly due to its
highly imbalanced distribution of 193 different classes. As
well, digitized landmarks and annotations make the retrieval
even more difficult. The IRMA x-ray images come with a
unified code to calculate the retrieval error. As shown in Figure
3, all images in the dataset have been assigned a 13-digit IRMA
code. The error per query image is a number between 0 and 1.
As a result, the total IRMA error for all test images is a number
between 0 and 1,733. We used the Python code provided by
ImageCLEFmed09 to compute the errors2 . The dataset can be
downloaded from IRMA website3 .

To construct the LRD, we go through the following steps:
Step 1. For every selected image block (local window), n
equidistant Radon projections are calculated. We specify each
element in each projection by R(ρi , θj ), where
θj =

(2)

and ρi refers to the i-th line of the projection under the j-th
direction.
Step 2. For all projections, we build the first order derivative
vector dθj to quantify projection change:
dθj (i) =

∂
R (ρ, θj ) = R(ρi+1 , θj ) − R(ρi , θj ).
∂ρ

(5)

Step 6. We capture the information of two Radon signals
in the k-th local histogram hk (i) by counting the quantized
rq elements and weighting them by corresponding s elements.
After generating all histograms, the main descriptor is created
by concatenating individual histograms hk . The length of the
descriptor is proportional to the number of blocks per column
ncolumn , the number of blocks per row nrows , and the number of
bins b per histogram in the blocks: length= ncolumn × nrows × b.

As mentioned before, several approaches have been proposed to use Radon projections and/or their binary versions
for retrieval of medical images. All these methods so far only
employ “global” projections; they apply Radon transform on
the entire image. However, we know that a major reason for
the success of LBP and HOG is their capability of capturing
“local” information in form of a histogram. Combining this
knowledge with what Radon projections can quantify, it is
obvious that one has to design a new class of projection-based
descriptors that can exploit local gradient information.


nπ
π 2π
,...,
−1 ,
0, ,
n n
n

(4)

To quantize each element of r and count its occurrence,
we apply the arctan operator to map the r elements from
(−∞, +∞) to [−π, +π]. Then, we can discretize the outcome
of the tan−1 (r) in b different bins resulting in a vector rq .
Step 5. We also build a summation vector s by adding the
absolute values of the derivatives:

III. L OCAL R ADON D ESCRIPTOR (LRD)



dθ (i)
.
dθ+α (i)

(3)

Step 3. Looking at each projection pi = R(ρk=1:L , θj ) of
length L, we build n/2 pairs of projections (pθi , pθj ) whereas
θj = θi + α.

1 http://kimia.uwaterloo.ca/
2 http://www.imageclef.org/2008/medical
3 https://ganymed.imib.rwth-aachen.de/irma

2

To appear in proceedings of the 7th Intern. Conf. on Image Processing Theory, Tools and Applications (IPTA 2017), Nov 28-Dec 1, Montreal, Canada.

Fig. 2. General steps to extract LRD from gradients of pairs of Radon projections. The arctan of the ratio and the sum of absolute values of paired
projections are used to assemble a histogram for each sub-image.

Through zero-padding, all images are resized to 256 × 256
(hence, ncolumns = nrows ). We tested 2 different ways to adjust
pair selection among n = 18 projections:
1) Orthogonal selection: With n = 18, we have θ =
{0◦ , 10◦ , 20◦ , . . . , 170◦ }. Orthogonal angles are then
selected as a pair such that we have a set P of 9 paired
projections:
P = {(0◦ , 90◦ ), (10◦ , 100◦ ), . . . , (80◦ , 170◦ )}.

2) Using characteristic projections: Based on [27], θ =
0◦ and 90◦ are the most characteristic projection directions to retrieve images from the IRMA dataset (xray images generally do not exhibit rotations, and these
directions provide very distinct projections). In order
to exploit this observation, we paired each projection
under π/2 by zero degree and all other projections by
90 degree such that we get a set P = P0◦ ∪ P90◦ with

Fig. 3. Two sample x-ray images and their corresponding IRMA codes.

INRIA Holidays dataset – Jegou et al. [26] have created
a searching dataset containing 1,991 high resolution images
in 500 different categories such as landscapes, buildings and
historical sites from different point of views and with various
sizes (Figure 4). The first image in each category is supposed
to be used as a query image. The performance of retrieving
method is evaluated via the percentage of true retrieval against
all 500 query images. The dataset can be downloaded from
INRIA website4 .

P0◦ = {(0◦ , 10◦ ), (0◦ , 20◦ ), . . . , (0◦ , 80◦ )},

(7)

and
P90◦ = {(90◦ , 100◦ ), (90◦ , 110◦ ), . . . , (90◦ , 170◦ )}.
(8)
The number of blocks and bins were tuned by exhaustive
search. The best number of blocks for INRIA Holidays dataset
was set to ncolumns = nrows = 3 (9 sub-images) and the best
number of bins was determined to be b = 22. For IRMA
dataset, these number were set to ncolumns = nrows = 5
(25 sub-images), and b = 12, respectively. The orthogonal
paring did not exhibit good results such that we conducted all
experiments with the characteristic projection paring P0◦ and
P90◦ .

B. Parameter Setting
There are several parameters which influence the performance of LRD and hence must be investigated. Perhaps two
important factors to be adjusted are the number of blocks
per row, nrows , and per column, ncolumns . Note that these two
parameters are needed to investigate in LBP and HoG as well.
Additionally, the overlap percentage Op between adjacent
blocks is certainly also a factor that may affect the retrieval
performance. And finally, we have to also specify how many
projection pairs should be selected, and which projections
should be paired to achieve the best results.
4 http://lear.inrialpes.fr/

(6)

Fig. 5 shows sample histograms for LRD in comparison
with LBP and HOG. Table 1 lists the histogram length (=
ncolumns × nrows × b) for all descriptors for the two datasets.
C. Results
For sake of comparison, we used well-established descriptors like HOG and LBP to retrieve images as well. We did

jegou/data.php

3

To appear in proceedings of the 7th Intern. Conf. on Image Processing Theory, Tools and Applications (IPTA 2017), Nov 28-Dec 1, Montreal, Canada.

Fig. 4. Sample images from the Holidays dataset.

Table 1. Sub-image and bin settings for LBP, HOG and LRD
(ncolumns × nrows × b).

LBP
HOG
LRD

IRMA dataset
12 × 12 × 59
14 × 14 × 18
5 × 5 × 12

Holidays dataset
5 × 5 × 33
3 × 3 × 24
3 × 3 × 22

Fig. 6. Sample retrieval results for LRD (left image is the query image).
The top three results are shown. Top: The first two results are correct
(IRMA errors: 0, 0, and 0.58), bottom: the first results is wrong (IRMA
errors: 0.24, 0.45 and 0.45).

Fig. 5. Top: A sample x-ray and one of its sub-images. Bottom (left to
right): LRD, LBP and HOG histograms of the sub-image.

the same parameter tuning steps for number of blocks and
the number of bins for HOG and the cell size in LBP. The
results of applying all three methods on the IRMA dataset is
compared with the best global Radon (GR) results as reported
in literature [27]. The maximum error is 1733 (if the retrieval
for all test images delivers wrong macthes). Hence, beside
error
IRMA error, we can also report the accuracy (= 1 − 1733
).
Fig. 6 shows sample retrieval results for LRD. We display
the top three matches for query images whereas for error
calculation we only consider the first match.
Table 2, shows the comparison between these four retrieving
methods (LRD, global Radon projections, HOG and LBP) as
well as their descriptor lengths. The retrieval times via k-

NN (with k = 1) are provided as well. LRD performance
is slightly below the LBP and close to HOG. However, we
can observe significant improvement in local implementation
of Radon projections versus global methods. The IRMA error
is considerably reduced (accuracy increase of more than 10%)
and the LRD descriptor length is 4 times shorter than its global
counterpart.
Although LBP and HOG are more accurate for the IRMA
images, their descriptor lengths are 28 and 12 times, respectively, longer than LRD’s, a fact that is also reflected in
computation times. Another interesting point is, for the INRIA
Holidays dataset, that LRD results are the same as HOG’s.
Also for this dataset, LRD delivers a shorter descriptor.
4

To appear in proceedings of the 7th Intern. Conf. on Image Processing Theory, Tools and Applications (IPTA 2017), Nov 28-Dec 1, Montreal, Canada.
Table 2. Retrieval results (GR stands for global Radon). LRD considerably improves the performance of projection-based descriptors as proposed via global
methods. As well, LRD does in fact deliver comparable results with state-of-the-art descriptors like LBP and HOG.

Method
LBP
HOG
LRD
GR

IRMA Dataset
Error (Accuracy) Length
244.81 (85.87%) 8496
266.36 (84.46%) 3528
287.77 (83.39%) 300
472.31 (72.74%) 1200

V. S UMMARY

Time
0.50s
0.23s
0.02s
0.11s

Holidays Dataset
True
Length Time
48.00% 825
0.03s
40.00% 216
0.0s
40.02% 198
0.0s
06.00% 2400
0.1s

vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 3634 – 3641, 2012.
[12] M. Heikkila and M. Pietikainen, “A texture-based method for modeling
the background and detecting moving objects,” IEEE transactions on
pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 657–662,
2006.
[13] C. Yao and S. Chen, “Retrieval of translated, rotated and scaled color
textures,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 913–929, 2002.
[14] S. Murala, R. P. Maheshwari, ·. R. Balasubramanian, S. Murala, and
R. Balasubramanian, “Directional local extrema patterns: a new descriptor for content based image retrieval,” Int J Multimed Info Retr, vol. 1,
no. March, pp. 191–203, 2012.
[15] P. Srivastava and A. Khare, “Integration of wavelet transform, Local
Binary Patterns and moments for content-based image retrieval,” Journal
of Visual Communication and Image Representation, vol. 42, pp. 78–
103, 2017.
[16] N. Dalal and B. Triggs, “Histograms of oriented gradients for human
detection,” Proceedings - 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, CVPR 2005, vol. I, pp. 886–
893, 2005.
[17] R. Hu and J. Collornosse, “A performance evaluation of gradient field
HOG descriptor for sketch based image retrieval,” Computer Vision and
Image Understanding, vol. 117, no. 7, pp. 790–806, 2013.
[18] O. Déniz, G. Bueno, J. Salido, and F. De la Torre, “Face recognition
using histograms of oriented gradients,” Pattern Recognition Letters,
vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 1598–1603, 2011.
[19] J. Radon, “On determination of functions by their integral values along
certain multiplicities,” Ber. der Sachische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Leipzig,(Germany), vol. 69, pp. 262–277, 1917.
[20] G. Beylkin, “Imaging of discontinuities in the inverse scattering problem
by inversion of a causal generalized Radon transform,” Journal of
Mathematical Physics, vol. 26, no. 1985, p. 99, 1985.
[21] H. R. Tizhoosh, S. Zhu, H. Lo, V. Chaudhari, and T. Mehdi, MinMax
Radon Barcodes for Medical Image Retrieval. Springer International
Publishing, 2016, pp. 617–627.
[22] S. Zhu and H. Tizhoosh, “Radon features and barcodes for medical
image retrieval via svm,” in 2016 International Joint Conference on
Neural Networks (IJCNN), 2016, pp. 5065–5071.
[23] M. Krause, J.-M. Hausherr, and W. Krenkel, “(micro)-crack detection
using local radon transform,” Materials Science and Engineering: A,
vol. 527, no. 26, pp. 7126–7131, 2010.
[24] R. Pourreza, T. Banaee, H. Pourreza, and R. D. Kakhki, “A radon
transform based approach for extraction of blood vessels in conjunctival
images,” in Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence.
Springer, 2008, pp. 948–956.
[25] T. Tommasi, B. Caputo, P. Welter, M. Güld, and T. Deserno, “Overview
of the CLEF 2009 medical image annotation track,” CEUR Workshop
Proceedings, vol. 1175, 2009.
[26] H. Jegou, M. Douze, and C. Schmid, “Hamming Embedding and
Weak Geometry Consistency for Large Scale Image Search â Extended
version,” Eccv, no. October, pp. 304–317, 2008.
[27] M. Babaie, H. R. Tizhoosh, and M. E. Shiri, “Retrieving Similar Cases
from Big Image Data Using Radon Barcodes with Single Projections,”
International Conference on Pattern Recognition Applications and Methods, 2017.

Radon projections can be used to construct descriptors for
image retrieval. However, global projections (projecting the
entire image) may not deliver expressive features suitable for
image retrieval. In this paper, we introduced Local Radon
Descriptor (LRD) as a new descriptor for image retrieval. It is
designed to capture Radon projections in local neighbourhoods
by looking at the ratio and sum of derivatives of paired
projections. LRD exhibits significant advantage over reported
works on projection-based approaches to image retrieval that
are globally implemented. As well, LRD is a very compact
descriptor. Experimental results on two datasets demonstrated
the potentials of LRD for both medical and non-medical
images.
R EFERENCES
[1] L. Nanni, A. Lumini, and S. Brahnam, “Survey on {LBP} based texture
descriptors for image classification,” Expert Systems with Applications,
[2] G.-H. Liu, L. Zhang, Y.-K. Hou, Z.-Y. Li, and J.-Y. Yang, “Image
retrieval based on multi-texton histogram,” Pattern Recognition, vol. 43,
no. 7, pp. 2380 – 2389, 2010.
[3] A. Kumar, J. Kim, W. Cai, M. Fulham, and D. Feng, “Content-based
medical image retrieval: A survey of applications to multidimensional
and multimodality data,” Journal of Digital Imaging, vol. 26, no. 6, pp.
1025–1039, 2013.
[4] S. Krig, Computer vision metrics. Springer, 2014.
[5] H. R. Tizhoosh, “Barcode annotations for medical image retrieval: A
preliminary investigation,” in 2015 IEEE International Conference on
Image Processing (ICIP), 2015, pp. 818–822.
[6] M. Kashif, T. Deserno, D. Haak, and S. Jonas, “Feature description with
SIFT, SURF, BRIEF, BRISK, or FREAK? A general question answered
for bone age assessment,” Computers in Biology and Medicine, vol. 68,
pp. 67–75, 2016.
[7] D. Sargent, C. Chen, C.-M. Tsai, Y.-F. Wang, and D. Koppel, “Feature
Detector and Descriptor for Medical Images,” Proceedings of the SPIE
International Symposium on Medical Imaging 2009, vol. 7258, pp. 1–8,
2009.
[8] M. Pietikainen and T. Ojala, “Nonparametric texture analysis with
complementary spatial operators,” Series in Machine Perception and
Artificial Intelligence, Volume 40: Texture Analysis in Machine Vision,
pp. 3–18, 2000.
[9] X. Shi, A. Zhu, J. Burt, W. Choi, R. Wang, T. Pei, B. Li, and C. Qin,
“An experiment using a circular neighborhood to calculate slope gradient
from a DEM,” Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, vol. 73,
no. 2, pp. 143–154, 2007.
[10] T. Ojala, M. Pietikäinen, and T. Mäenpää, “Multiresolution gray-scale
and rotation invariant texture classification with local binary patterns,”
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,
vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 971–987, 2002.
[11] T. Ahonen and M. Hadid, A.and Pietikainen, “Face description with local
binary patterns: Application to face recognition,” IEEE Trans. Pattern
Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 28, no. 12, pp. 2037–2041, 2006.

5

