MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Batch Image Processing in Facial Detection Applications

2021· article· en· W3159390462 on OpenAlexaff
Mousa Al-Qawasmi, Nagi Mekhiel, Kwame Bannor, Blessvin Christer Devakumar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceImage processingComputer visionBatch processingFace detectionPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Facial recognition system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Batch image processing for facial detection involves running a facial detection algorithm, in parallel, on batches containing multiple images rather than serially on a sequence consisting of single images. Batch image processing is crucial in live-video facial detection applications where the real-time processing of many frames is required. The performance of a facial detection application can be drastically improved when facial detection is done in parallel on batches containing multiple images. In this work, we analyze the performance gain due to running a GPU-based facial detection algorithm, in parallel, on batches of images versus the performance of running the GPU-based facial detection algorithm serially on a sequence of single images. We vary the number of images in which faces are to-be detected from 128 images to 1024 images. For each of the prior mentioned image sets, we measure the performance when the number of images per detection batch is varied from 1 image per batch (sequential) to 1024 images per batch in multiples of 2. We find that the technique of batch image processing improves the performance of a face detection application by approximately 10-11x on to-be-detected image sets consisting of 128, 256, and 1024 images. This performance improvement is attributed to a reduction in the communication overhead between the host CPU and GPU occurring on the PCI bus. Moreover, the technique of batch image processing enables the utilization of more of the GPU's resources that are left underutilized when GPU-based facial detection is done serially on a sequence of single images.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207