RPNet: Gait Recognition With Relationships Between Each Body-Parts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At present, many studies have shown that partitioning the gait sequence and its feature map can improve the accuracy of gait recognition. However, most models just cut the feature map at a fixed single scale, which loses the dependence between various parts. So, our paper proposes a structure called Part Feature Relationship Extractor (PFRE) to discover all of the relationships between each parts for gait recognition. The paper uses PFRE and a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to form the RPNet. PFRE is divided into two parts. One part that we call the Total-Partial Feature Extractor (TPFE) is used to extract the features of different scale blocks, and the other part, called the Adjacent Feature Relation Extractor (AFRE), is used to find the relationships between each block. At the same time, the paper adjusts the number of input frames during training to perform quantitative experiments and finds the rule between the number of input frames and the performance of the model. Our model is tested on three public gait datasets, CASIA-B, OU-LP and OU-MVLP. It exhibits a significant level of robustness to occlusion situations, and achieves accuracies of 92.82% and 80.26% on CASIA-B under BG # and CL # conditions, respectively. The results show that our method reaches the top level among state-of-the-art methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".