Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
IJSREM64354
Volume:
10 |
5 |
May 2026
Pages:
1-8
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
Department of General Engineering
Annai Mathammal Sheela Engineering College

Department of Computer Science
Nehru Memorial College
Edge detection remains a cornerstone of digital image processing, enabling accurate feature extraction and object recognition across diverse applications. Classical operators such as Roberts, Prewitt, and Sobel laid the foundation by employing gradient-based techniques, while second-order approaches like the Laplacian of Gaussian (LoG) and Difference of Gaussians (DoG) enhanced sensitivity to fine details[1]. However, these methods often struggle with noise and edge continuity. Recent advancements, particularly the Canny detector, Deriche filter, and SUSAN algorithm, have introduced hybrid strategies that balance precision, robustness, and computational efficiency[2]. Contemporary research trends further integrate edge detection with machine learning and deep vision frameworks, enabling adaptive, context-aware analysis in fields such as medical imaging, autonomous navigation, and intelligent surveillance[3]. This paper presents a comparative study of classical and modern edge detection techniques, highlighting their strengths, limitations, and evolving relevance. The analysis underscores the transition from traditional operators to advanced vision-driven approaches shaping next-generation image analytics.
KEYWORDS
This study highlights the progression from classical edge detection operators to modern vision-driven techniques. Classical methods such as Roberts, Prewitt, and Sobel provide simple baselines but suffer from noise sensitivity and fragmented edges. Second-order approaches like LoG and DoG improve detail detection yet remain prone to false edges. Modern algorithms—Canny, Deriche, and SUSAN—deliver superior accuracy, robustness, and edge continuity, making them more effective for complex and real-time applications. Among these, the Canny edge detector emerges as the best-performing method, consistently achieving the highest accuracy and producing thin, continuous edges with strong noise suppression [2]. Overall, the transition toward hybrid and AI-integrated approaches underscores their growing relevance in medical imaging, biometric identification, autonomous navigation, and next-generation computer vision systems [3][6].
1. Wang, L., Zhang, Y., & Li, H. (2020). Comparative study of classical and modern edge detection algorithms in digital image processing. Journal of Visual Communication and ImageRepresentation,71,102844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvcir.2020.102844 2. Singh, R., & Kumar, A. (2021). Performance evaluation of edge detection techniques for medical image segmentation. Biomedical Signal Processing andControl,68,102703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bspc.2021.102703 3. Zhao, M., Chen, X., & Xu, Y. (2022). Deep learning-based hybrid edge detection for autonomous navigation. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(12), 23456–23467. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2022.3145678 4. Ahmed, S., & Rahman, M. (2023). Robust edge detection under varying illumination using SUSAN and adaptive thresholding. Pattern Recognition Letters,165,45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2023.02.005 5. Li, Q., & Zhou, J. (2024). Real-time edge detection using Deriche filters in embedded vision systems. Sensors,24(7),3124. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24073124 6. Chen, Y., & Wang, J. (2025). Context-aware edge detection with deep vision frameworks: A survey. Artificial Intelligence Review, 58(4), 2891–2915. 7. Huang, Y., Liu, Z., & Chen, H. (2020). Edge detection techniques: A comparative review of classical operators and modern approaches. Information Sciences, 512,36–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2019.09.015 8. Patel, R., & Mehta, K. (2021). Evaluation of Canny and Deriche edge detectors for real-time medical imaging applications. Biomedical Engineering Letters, 11(2), 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-021-00179-4 9. Gao, J., Wang, L., & Xu, P. (2023). SUSAN-based adaptive edge detection under varying illumination conditions. Pattern Recognition Letters, 165, 120–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2023.02.010 10. Sharma, A., & Verma, S. (2024). Deep learning integrated edge detection: Bridging classical operators with modern vision frameworks. Applied Intelligence, 54(6), 7890–7905. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-024-03789-2
Publication Date
5/31/2026
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
0
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
6
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...