MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245337266 · doi:10.24908/iqurcp.9003

Facial Recognition and Tracking using the Eigenface Technique

2016· article· en· W4245337266 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mallory Ketcheson

Bibliographic record

VenueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference Proceedings · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Object Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEigenfaceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceFace (sociological concept)PixelImage (mathematics)Facial recognition systemTracking (education)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eigenfaces is a computer vision technique developed in 1991 by M. Turk and A.Pentland used to distinguish an image of a face with only a single 2D image. The purpose of this project was to develop a system capable of automatically recognizing and tracking a face throughout a real-time video using the Eigenfaces technique. These techniques take advantage of the assumptions that faces share relatively the same features and are usually upright. The Eigenfaces technique transforms several images of individual faces from an image into vectors based on the pixel values contained within the image. The vectors are then used to create an n-dimensional space in which future images can be placed to determine the likelihood the image contains a face. This project segments a single image into a grid and applies the Eigenface technique to each segment rather than the entire image. The result of this process is the successful application to each image in a video to track the movement of a face throughout the video in real time.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsSame topicImage and Object Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207