MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952541350 · doi:10.1109/crv.2018.00049

An Evaluation of Deep CNN Baselines for Scene-Independent Person Re-identification

2018· preprint· en· W2952541350 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Marchwica, Michael Jamieson, Parthipan Siva

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsSenstar (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceBaseline (sea)Software deploymentIdentification (biology)Deep learningDomain (mathematical analysis)Range (aeronautics)Deep neural networksMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, a variety of proposed methods based on deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have improved the state of the art for large-scale person re-identification (ReID). While a large number of optimizations and network improvements have been proposed, there has been relatively little evaluation of the influence of training data and baseline network architecture. In particular, it is usually assumed either that networks are trained on labeled data from the deployment location (scene-dependent), or else adapted with unlabeled data, both of which complicate system deployment. In this paper, we investigate the feasibility of achieving scene-independent person ReID by forming a large composite dataset for training. We present an in-depth comparison of several CNN baseline architectures for both scene-dependent and scene-independent ReID, across a range of training dataset sizes. We show that scene-independent ReID can produce leading-edge results, competitive with unsupervised domain adaption techniques. Finally, we introduce a new dataset for comparing within-camera and across-camera person ReID.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.864

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207