Person Re-Identification with RGB–D and RGB–IR Sensors: A Comprehensive Survey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Learning about appearance embedding is of great importance for a variety of different computer-vision applications, which has prompted a surge in person re-identification (Re-ID) papers. The aim of these papers has been to identify an individual over a set of non-overlapping cameras. Despite recent advances in RGB-RGB Re-ID approaches with deep-learning architectures, the approach fails to consistently work well when there are low resolutions in dark conditions. The introduction of different sensors (i.e., RGB-D and infrared (IR)) enables the capture of appearances even in dark conditions. Recently, a lot of research has been dedicated to addressing the issue of finding appearance embedding in dark conditions using different advanced camera sensors. In this paper, we give a comprehensive overview of existing Re-ID approaches that utilize the additional information from different sensor-based methods to address the constraints faced by RGB camera-based person Re-ID systems. Although there are a number of survey papers that consider either the RGB-RGB or Visible-IR scenarios, there are none that consider both RGB-D and RGB-IR. In this paper, we present a detailed taxonomy of the existing approaches along with the existing RGB-D and RGB-IR person Re-ID datasets. Then, we summarize the performance of state-of-the-art methods on several representative RGB-D and RGB-IR datasets. Finally, future directions and current issues are considered for improving the different sensor-based person Re-ID systems.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it