MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2779464705 · doi:10.1109/iccv.2017.548

Moving Object Detection in Time-Lapse or Motion Trigger Image Sequences Using Low-Rank and Invariant Sparse Decomposition

2017· article· en· W2779464705 on OpenAlexafffund
Moein Shakeri, Hong Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceBackground subtractionComputer scienceOutlierComputer visionSparse approximationInvariant (physics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Object detectionBenchmark (surveying)Representation (politics)PixelMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low-rank and sparse representation based methods have attracted wide attention in background subtraction and moving object detection, where moving objects in the scene are modeled as pixel-wise sparse outliers. Since in real scenarios moving objects are also structurally sparse, recently researchers have attempted to extract moving objects using structured sparse outliers. Although existing methods with structured sparsity-inducing norms produce promising results, they are still vulnerable to various illumination changes that frequently occur in real environments, specifically for time-lapse image sequences where assumptions about sparsity between images such as group sparsity are not valid. In this paper, we first introduce a prior map obtained by illumination invariant representation of images. Next, we propose a low-rank and invariant sparse decomposition using the prior map to detect moving objects under significant illumination changes. Experiments on challenging benchmark datasets demonstrate the superior performance of our proposed method under complex illumination changes.

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)0.002
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations29
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207