MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012766327 · doi:10.1117/12.476458

Tracking objects with shadows

2003· article· en· W2012766327 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Jiang, Mark S. Drew

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceVideo trackingComputer scienceTracking (education)Object (grammar)Optical flowShadow (psychology)Affine transformationInvariant (physics)Image (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a new method for tracking objects with shadows. Traditional motion-based tracking schemes cannot usually distinguish the shadow from the object itself, and this results in a falsely captured object shape. If we want to utilize the object's shape information for a pattern recognition task, this poses a severe difficulty. In this paper we present a color processing scheme to project the image into an illumination invariant space such that the shadow's effect is greatly attenuated. The optical flow in this projected image together with the original image is used as a reference for object tracking so that we can extract the real object shape in the tracking process. We present a modified snake model for general video object tracking. A new external force is introduced into the snake equation based on the predictive contour such that the active contour is attracted to a shape similar to the one in the previous video frame. The proposed method can deal with the problem of an object's ceasing movement temporarily, and can also avoid the problem of the snake tracking into the object interior. Global affine motion estimation is applied to eliminate the effect of camera motion and hence the method can be applied in a general video environment. Experimental results show that the proposed method can track the real object even if there is strong shadow influence.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations25
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207