MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282526122 · doi:10.1109/reconfig.2015.7393281

A real-time reconfigurable architecture for face detection

2015· article· en· W2282526122 on OpenAlexaff
Viorel Suse, Dan Ionescu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceField-programmable gate arrayReconfigurabilityFace detectionAdaBoostObject detectionBlock (permutation group theory)Artificial intelligenceReconfigurable computingViola–Jones object detection frameworkArchitectureFace (sociological concept)VirtexFacial recognition systemFeature extractionComputer visionComputer hardwareComputer architecturePattern recognition (psychology)Classifier (UML)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new hardware architecture for pattern detection and classification specific for human face detection including raw image acquisition, integral image creation, window extraction, pyramid generation, and detection algorithms in simultaneous steps. The detection part of the face is implemented in a reconfigurable way by providing different paths for either Viola-Jones or block LBP algorithms. The Adaboost algorithm using Haar features are calculated in parallel being implemented in hardware. The reconfigurability of the hardware relates to the implementation of high level commands which can switch between different algorithms for face detection as well as between various paths used for image acquisition. As such, the architecture can be used by either still or video-based face detection which very important for face tracking. The performance of the architecture depends very much of the FPGA device used. An implementation on Xilinx Spartan 6, ZYNQ, and Xilinx Virtex-7 has been accomplished. The performances of the two implementations are compared in the end of this paper.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.250
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
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207