MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200586929 · doi:10.1109/tcyb.2021.3131569

Robust and Precise Facial Landmark Detection by Self-Calibrated Pose Attention Network

2021· article· en· W4200586929 on OpenAlexaff
Jun Wan, Hui Xi, Jie Zhou, Zhihui Lai, Witold Pedrycz, Xu Wang, Hang Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cybernetics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersShenzhen Science and Technology Innovation ProgramNatural Science Foundation of Hubei ProvinceNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLandmarkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)Benchmark (surveying)PoseComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Facial expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current fully supervised facial landmark detection methods have progressed rapidly and achieved remarkable performance. However, they still suffer when coping with faces under large poses and heavy occlusions for inaccurate facial shape constraints and insufficient labeled training samples. In this article, we propose a semisupervised framework, that is, a self-calibrated pose attention network (SCPAN) to achieve more robust and precise facial landmark detection in challenging scenarios. To be specific, a boundary-aware landmark intensity (BALI) field is proposed to model more effective facial shape constraints by fusing boundary and landmark intensity field information. Moreover, a self-calibrated pose attention (SCPA) model is designed to provide a self-learned objective function that enforces intermediate supervision without label information by introducing a self-calibrated mechanism and a pose attention mask. We show that by integrating the BALI fields and SCPA model into a novel SCPAN, more facial prior knowledge can be learned and the detection accuracy and robustness of our method for faces with large poses and heavy occlusions have been improved. The experimental results obtained for challenging benchmark datasets demonstrate that our approach outperforms state-of-the-art methods in the literature.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CyberneticsSame topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207