<html><head><meta name="color-scheme" content="light dark"></head><body><pre style="word-wrap: break-word; white-space: pre-wrap;">The last test visually compares the results of both detectors on very textured
images, also difficult to process for other detectors from the literature. 
The minimal size parameter was raised to 12 pixels to reject small segments
considered as outliers.
On the example of \RefFig{fig:hard}, the new detector provides less residual
outliers and misaligned segments, and globally more relevant informations
to infere the structure of the brick wall.
\begin{figure}
  \center
  \begin{tabular}{
      c@{\hspace{0.1cm}}c@{\hspace{0.1cm}}c@{\hspace{0.1cm}}}
    \includegraphics[width=0.205\textwidth]{Fig_method/parpaings.png} &amp;
    \includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{Expe_hard/hardDetailOld.png} &amp;
    \includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{Expe_hard/hardDetailNew.png}
    \begin{picture}(1,1)
      {\color{red}{
        \put(-302,34){\framebox(29,11.5)}
      }}
      {\color{dwhite}{
        \put(-266,4.5){\circle*{8}}
        \put(-171,4.5){\circle*{8}}
        \put(-58,4.5){\circle*{8}}
      }}
      \put(-268.5,2){a}
      \put(-173.5,2){b}
      \put(-60.5,2){c}
    \end{picture}
  \end{tabular}
  \caption{Results on very textured images: test image (a),
           detail (top left corner) on the segments found by the old
           detector (b) and on those found by the new detector (c).}
  \label{fig:hard}
\end{figure}
</pre></body></html>