MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045524092 · doi:10.1109/cvprw50498.2020.00061

Fast Human Head and Shoulder Detection Using Convolutional Networks and RGBD Data

2020· article· en· W3045524092 on OpenAlexaff
Wassim A. El Ahmar, Farzan Erlik Nowruzi, Robert Laganière

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHuman Pose and Action Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkComputationDeep learningBounding overwatchHead (geology)RGB color modelHuman headPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionImage (mathematics)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a new real-time approach for human head and shoulder detection from RGB-D data based on a combination of image processing and deep learning approaches. Candidate head-top locations (CHL) are generated from a fast and accurate image processing algorithm that operates on depth data. We propose enhancements to the CHL algorithm making it three times faster. Various deep learning models are then evaluated for the tasks of classification and detection on the candidate head-top locations to regress the head bounding boxes and detect shoulder keypoints. We propose three different models based on convolutional neural networks for this problem. Experimental results for different architectures of our model are discussed. We also compare the performance of our models to other state of the art methods in terms of accuracy of detections and computational cost and show that our proposed models are on par with the state of the art in terms of precision-recall of head detection and precision of shoulders detection, with the biggest advantage of our models being in terms of computation time. We also analyze the effect of adding the depth channel on the performance of the network.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Pose and Action RecognitionFrench-language works237,207