MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145536551 · doi:10.1109/tcsvt.2008.928888

Human Activity Recognition Based on Silhouette Directionality

2008· article· en· W2145536551 on OpenAlexaff
Meghna Singh, Anup Basu, Mrinal Mandal

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilhouetteArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceActivity recognitionCluster analysisFeature vectorDirectionalityPattern recognition (psychology)Background subtractionZoomFeature extractionMotion (physics)Feature (linguistics)PixelEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in computer vision and pattern recognition have fueled numerous initiatives that aim to intelligently recognize human activities. In this paper, we propose an algorithm for nonintrusive human activity recognition. We use an adaptive background-foreground separation technique to extract motion information and generate silhouettes (foreground) from the input videos. We then derive directionality-based feature vectors (directional vectors) from the silhouette contours and use the distinct data distribution of directional vectors in a vector space for clustering and recognition. We also exploit the dynamic characteristic of human motion in order to smooth decisions over time and reduce errors in activity recognition. Our approach is monocular, tolerant to moderate view changes, and can be applied to both frontal and lateral views of most activities. Experiments with short and long video sequences show robust recognition under conditions of varying view angles, zoom depths, backgrounds, and frame rates.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations56
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video TechnologySame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207