MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951921782 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1405.0234

Retrieval in Long Surveillance Videos using User Described Motion and Object Attributes

2014· preprint· en· W2951921782 on OpenAlexaff
Greg Castañón, Mohamed Elgharib, Venkatesh Saligrama, Pierre‐Marc Jodoin

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionFocus (optics)Motion (physics)Object (grammar)Object detectionSearch engine indexingPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a content-based retrieval method for long surveillance videos both for wide-area (Airborne) as well as near-field imagery (CCTV). Our goal is to retrieve video segments, with a focus on detecting objects moving on routes, that match user-defined events of interest. The sheer size and remote locations where surveillance videos are acquired, necessitates highly compressed representations that are also meaningful for supporting user-defined queries. To address these challenges we archive long-surveillance video through lightweight processing based on low-level local spatio-temporal extraction of motion and object features. These are then hashed into an inverted index using locality-sensitive hashing (LSH). This local approach allows for query flexibility as well as leads to significant gains in compression. Our second task is to extract partial matches to the user-created query and assembles them into full matches using Dynamic Programming (DP). DP exploits causality to assemble the indexed low level features into a video segment which matches the query route. We examine CCTV and Airborne footage, whose low contrast makes motion extraction more difficult. We generate robust motion estimates for Airborne data using a tracklets generation algorithm while we use Horn and Schunck approach to generate motion estimates for CCTV. Our approach handles long routes, low contrasts and occlusion. We derive bounds on the rate of false positives and demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach for counting, motion pattern recognition and abandoned object applications.

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)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207