MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170093232 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2009.5206613

Expression-insensitive 3D face recognition using sparse representation

2009· article· en· W2170093232 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFacial recognition systemPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceFacial expressionSparse approximationPoolingFace (sociological concept)Representation (politics)Three-dimensional face recognitionExpression (computer science)Set (abstract data type)Feature (linguistics)Polygon meshFace Recognition Grand ChallengeRanking (information retrieval)Face detection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a face recognition method based on sparse representation for recognizing 3D face meshes under expressions using low-level geometric features. First, to enable the application of the sparse representation framework, we develop a uniform remeshing scheme to establish a consistent sampling pattern across 3D faces. To handle facial expressions, we design a feature pooling and ranking scheme to collect various types of low-level geometric features and rank them according to their sensitivities to facial expressions. By simply applying the sparse representation framework to the collected low-level features, our proposed method already achieves satisfactory recognition rates, which demonstrates the efficacy of the framework for 3D face recognition. To further improve results in the presence of severe facial expressions, we show that by choosing higher-ranked, i.e., expression-insensitive, features, the recognition rates approach those for neutral faces, without requiring an extensive set of reference faces for each individual to cover possible variations caused by expressions as proposed in previous work. We apply our face recognition method to the GavabDB and FRGC 2.0 databases and demonstrate encouraging results.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.220 · 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