MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215533246 · doi:10.3390/jimaging7120255

Evaluation of 2D-/3D-Feet-Detection Methods for Semi-Autonomous Powered Wheelchair Navigation

2021· article· en· W3215533246 on OpenAlexaff
Cristian Vilar, Silvia Krug, Faisal Z. Qureshi, Mattias O’Nils

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Imaging · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWheelchairComputer visionArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkUsabilityObstacleHistogramHuman–computer interactionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Powered wheelchairs have enhanced the mobility and quality of life of people with special needs. The next step in the development of powered wheelchairs is to incorporate sensors and electronic systems for new control applications and capabilities to improve their usability and the safety of their operation, such as obstacle avoidance or autonomous driving. However, autonomous powered wheelchairs require safe navigation in different environments and scenarios, making their development complex. In our research, we propose, instead, to develop contactless control for powered wheelchairs where the position of the caregiver is used as a control reference. Hence, we used a depth camera to recognize the caregiver and measure at the same time their relative distance from the powered wheelchair. In this paper, we compared two different approaches for real-time object recognition using a 3DHOG hand-crafted object descriptor based on a 3D extension of the histogram of oriented gradients (HOG) and a convolutional neural network based on YOLOv4-Tiny. To evaluate both approaches, we constructed Miun-Feet-a custom dataset of images of labeled caregiver's feet in different scenarios, with backgrounds, objects, and lighting conditions. The experimental results showed that the YOLOv4-Tiny approach outperformed 3DHOG in all the analyzed cases. In addition, the results showed that the recognition accuracy was not improved using the depth channel, enabling the use of a monocular RGB camera only instead of a depth camera and reducing the computational cost and heat dissipation limitations. Hence, the paper proposes an additional method to compute the caregiver's distance and angle from the Powered Wheelchair (PW) using only the RGB data. This work shows that it is feasible to use the location of the caregiver's feet as a control signal for the control of a powered wheelchair and that it is possible to use a monocular RGB camera to compute their relative positions.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ImagingSame topicGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyFrench-language works237,207