MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1935588821 · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2015.7301354

Head pose estimation in the wild using approximate view manifolds

2015· article· en· W1935588821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kalaivani Sundararajan, Damon L. Woodard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePoseEmbeddingKernel (algebra)Pattern recognition (psychology)Nonlinear dimensionality reductionManifold (fluid mechanics)Computer scienceSimilarity (geometry)MathematicsComputer visionComputationImage (mathematics)AlgorithmDimensionality reductionCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a head pose estimation method for unconstrained images using feature-based manifold embedding. The main challenge of manifold embedding methods is to learn a similarity kernel that is reflective of variations only due to head pose and ignore other sources of variation. To address this challenge, we have used the feature correspondences of identity-invariant Geometric Blur features to learn a similarity kernel. To speed up the computation of the similarity kernel, we have used spatial pyramidal matching to approximate feature correspondences and random subsampling of training samples to approximate graph neighborhood. In addition to these approximations, we have used the Nyström approximation to embed out-of-sample test images in an efficient manner. Using these approximations, an approximate view manifold was learned for 14000 images in the Annotated Facial Landmarks in the Wild (AFLW) dataset. With the learned manifold, head pose estimation was performed on four in-the-wild face datasets - AFLW (remaining 7000 images), AFW, McGill and YouTube Faces. The Approximate View Manifold training achieves a 7X speedup compared to the non-approximated Learning-manifold-in-the-wild approach [15]. Further, pose estimation using the proposed approach shows significant improvement in accuracy and reduced Mean Angular Error(MAE) compared to other methods [36, 1, 29] on the challenging AFLW (7041 images), McGill (6833 images) and YouTube Faces (22534 images) datasets.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0030.002

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations31
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207