MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1517719864 · doi:10.5565/rev/elcvia.582

Autonomous UAV for Suspicious Action Detection using Pictorial Human Pose Estimation and Classification

2014· article· en· W1517719864 on OpenAlexaff
Surya Penmetsa, Fatima Minhuj, Amarjot Singh, SN Omkar

Bibliographic record

VenueELCVIA Electronic Letters on Computer Vision and Image Analysis · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPoseRobustness (evolution)Orientation (vector space)Action (physics)ParsingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Visual autonomous systems capable of monitoring crowded areas and alerting the authorities in occurrence of a suspicious action can play a vital role in controlling crime rate. Previous atte mpts have been made to monitor crime using posture recognition but nothing exclusive to investigating actions of people in large populated area has been cited. In order resolve this shortcoming, we propose an autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) visual surveillance system that locates humans in image frames followed by pose estimation using weak constraints on position, appearance of body parts and image parsing. The estimated pose, represented as a pictorial structure, is flagged using the proposed Hough Orientation Calculator (HOC) on close resemblance with any pose in the suspicious action dataset. The robustness of the system is demonstrated on videos recorded using a UAV with no prior knowledge of background, lighting or location and scale of the human in the image. The system produces an accuracy of 71% and can also be applied on various other video sources such as CCTV camera.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueELCVIA Electronic Letters on Computer Vision and Image AnalysisSame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207