The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A survey of methods and strategies in character segmentation
Abstract
Character segmentation has long been a critical area of the OCR process. The higher recognition rates for isolated characters vs. those obtained for words and connected character strings well illustrate this fact. A good part of recent progress in reading unconstrained printed and written text may be ascribed to more insightful handling of segmentation. This paper provides a review of these advances. The aim is to provide an appreciation for the range of techniques that have been developed, rather than to simply list sources. Segmentation methods are listed under four main headings. What may be termed the "classical" approach consists of methods that partition the input image into subimages, which are then classified. The operation of attempting to decompose the image into classifiable units is called "dissection." The second class of methods avoids dissection, and segments the image either explicitly, by classification of prespecified windows, or implicitly by classification of subsets of spatial features collected from the image as a whole. The third strategy is a hybrid of the first two, employing dissection together with recombination rules to define potential segments, but using classification to select from the range of admissible segmentation possibilities offered by these subimages. Finally, holistic approaches that avoid segmentation by recognizing entire character strings as units are described.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The state of the art in online handwriting recognition
Tappert, C. C., Suen, C. Y., & Wakahara, T. (1990) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.57669 · Cited by 857
Cited by
Twenty years of document image analysis in PAMI
Nagy, G. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.824820 · Cited by 507
Recognition and retrieval of mathematical expressions
Zanibbi, R., & Blostein, D. (2012) · International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition (IJDAR) · doi:10.1007/s10032-011-0174-4 · Cited by 284
Text Recognition in the Wild: A Survey
Chen, X., Jin, L., Zhu, Y., Luo, C., & Wang, T. (2022) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3440756 · Cited by 205
“presentations [147] and synthesis approaches [171], [172], an intuitive but rarely noticed solution is to separate the text content from complex backgrounds. Although traditional binarization methods [173] work well on document images, they fail to handle substantial variations in text appearance and noise in natural…”
BackgroundINFTY: an integrated OCR system for mathematical documents
Suzuki, M., Tamari, F., Fukuda, R., Uchida, S., & Kanahori, T. (2003) · Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Document engineering · doi:10.1145/958220.958239 · Cited by 174
Steger, C. (2017) · Handbook of Machine and Computer Vision · doi:10.1002/9783527413409.ch9 · Cited by 6
Metadata
- Authors
- Casey, R. G., & Lecolinet, E.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
- Published
- 1996-07
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 690-706
- ISSN
- 0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2029189646
- Cited by
- 813
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 17.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A survey of methods and strategies in character segmentation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/34.506792
- The paper
- Casey, R. G., & Lecolinet, E. (1996). A survey of methods and strategies in character segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1109/34.506792
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.