MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229001174 · doi:10.3390/app12031021

A CNN-RNN Combined Structure for Real-World Violence Detection in Surveillance Cameras

2022· article· en· W4229001174 on OpenAlexafffund
Soheil Vosta, Kin‐Choong Yow

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceAnomaly detectionConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surveillance cameras have been increasingly used in many public and private spaces in recent years to increase the security of those areas. Although many companies still recruit someone to monitor the cameras, the person recruited is more likely to miss some abnormal events in the camera feeds due to human error. Therefore, monitoring surveillance cameras could be a waste of time and energy. On the other hand, many researchers worked on surveillance data and proposed several methods to detect abnormal events automatically. As a result, if any anomalous happens in front of the surveillance cameras, it can be detected immediately. Therefore, we introduced a model for detecting abnormal events in the surveillance camera feed. In this work, we designed a model by implementing a well-known convolutional neural network (ResNet50) for extracting essential features of each frame of our input stream followed by a particular schema of recurrent neural networks (ConvLSTM) for detecting abnormal events in our time-series dataset. Furthermore, in contrast with previous works, which mainly focused on hand-crafted datasets, our dataset took real-time surveillance camera feeds with different subjects and environments. In addition, we classify normal and abnormal events and show the method’s ability to find the right category for each anomaly. Therefore, we categorized our data into three main and essential categories: the first groups mainly need firefighting service, while the second and third categories are about thefts and violent behaviour. We implemented the proposed method on the UCF-Crime dataset and achieved 81.71% in AUC, higher than other models like C3D on the same dataset. Our future work focuses on adding an attention layer to the existing model to detect more abnormal events.

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)0.001
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations121
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207