Effects of Image Quality on the Accuracy Human Pose Estimation and Detection of Eye Lid Opening/Closing Using Openpose and DLib
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The application of computer models in continuous patient activity monitoring using video cameras is complicated by the capture of images of varying qualities due to poor lighting conditions and lower image resolutions. Insufficient literature has assessed the effects of image resolution, color depth, noise level, and low light on the inference of eye opening and closing and body landmarks from digital images. METHOD: This study systematically assessed the effects of varying image resolutions (from 100 × 100 pixels to 20 × 20 pixels at an interval of 10 pixels), lighting conditions (from 42 to 2 lux with an interval of 2 lux), color-depths (from 16.7 M colors to 8 M, 1 M, 512 K, 216 K, 64 K, 8 K, 1 K, 729, 512, 343, 216, 125, 64, 27, and 8 colors), and noise levels on the accuracy and model performance in eye dimension estimation and body keypoint localization using the Dlib library and OpenPose with images from the Closed Eyes in the Wild and the COCO datasets, as well as photographs of the face captured at different light intensities. RESULTS: The model accuracy and rate of model failure remained acceptable at an image resolution of 60 × 60 pixels, a color depth of 343 colors, a light intensity of 14 lux, and a Gaussian noise level of 4% (i.e., 4% of pixels replaced by Gaussian noise). CONCLUSIONS: The Dlib and OpenPose models failed to detect eye dimensions and body keypoints only at low image resolutions, lighting conditions, and color depths. CLINICAL IMPACT: Our established baseline threshold values will be useful for future work in the application of computer vision in continuous patient monitoring.
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".