MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1637150239 · doi:10.1109/icme.2005.1521488

Human Posture Recognition with Convex Programming

2005· article· en· W1637150239 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Jiang, Ze-Nian Li, Mark S. Drew

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Artificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionScheme (mathematics)Linear programmingObject (grammar)Similarity (geometry)Convex optimizationRegular polygonImage (mathematics)MathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel human posture recognition method us ing convex programming based matching schemes. Instead of trying to segment the object from the background, we develop a novel multistage linear programming scheme to locate the target by searching for the best matching region based on an automatically acquired graph template. The linear programming based visual matching scheme gener ates relatively dense matching patterns and thus presents a key for robust object matching and human posture recogni tion. By matching distance transformations of edge maps, the proposed scheme is able to match figures with large ap pearance changes. We further present object recognition methods based on the similarity of the exemplar with the matching target. The proposed scheme can also be used for recognizing multiple targets in an image. Experiments show promising results for recognizing human postures in clut tered environments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207