MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127958493 · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2009.5204295

Posture invariant gender classification for 3D human models

2009· article· en· W2127958493 on OpenAlexaff
Stefanie Wuhrer, Chang Shu, Marc Rioux

Bibliographic record

Venue2009 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeodesicArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Linear discriminant analysisInvariant (physics)Polygon meshSupport vector machineComputer scienceMathematicsComputer visionGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study the behaviorally important task of gender classification based on the human body shape. We propose a new technique to classify by gender human bodies represented by possibly incomplete triangular meshes obtained using laser range scanners. The classification algorithm is invariant of the posture of the human body. Geodesic distances on the mesh are used for classification. Our results indicate that the geodesic distances between the chest and the wrists and the geodesic distances between the lower back and the face are the most important ones for gender classification. The classification is shown to perform well for different postures of the human subjects. We model the geodesic distance distributions as Gaussian distributions and compute the quality of the classification for three standard methods in pattern recognition: linear discriminant functions, Bayesian discriminant functions, and support vector machines. All of the experiments yield high classification accuracy. For instance, when support vector machines are used, the classification accuracy is at least 93% for all of our experiments. This shows that geodesic distances are suitable to discriminate humans by gender.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2009 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition WorkshopsSame topicGait Recognition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207