Student: Yao-Sheng Wang Advisor: Prof. Sheng-Jyh Wang ARTICULATED HUMAN DETECTION 1 Department of Electronics Engineering National Chiao Tung University.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Poselets: Body Part Detectors trained Using 3D Human Pose Annotations Lubomir Bourdev & Jitendra Malik ICCV 2009.
Advertisements

Pose Estimation and Segmentation of People in 3D Movies Karteek Alahari, Guillaume Seguin, Josef Sivic, Ivan Laptev Inria, Ecole Normale Superieure ICCV.
Articulated People Detection and Pose Estimation: Reshaping the Future
Jan-Michael Frahm, Enrique Dunn Spring 2013
Recovering Human Body Configurations: Combining Segmentation and Recognition Greg Mori, Xiaofeng Ren, and Jitentendra Malik (UC Berkeley) Alexei A. Efros.
- Recovering Human Body Configurations: Combining Segmentation and Recognition (CVPR’04) Greg Mori, Xiaofeng Ren, Alexei A. Efros and Jitendra Malik -
Computer Vision for Human-Computer InteractionResearch Group, Universität Karlsruhe (TH) cv:hci Dr. Edgar Seemann 1 Computer Vision: Histograms of Oriented.
Many slides based on P. FelzenszwalbP. Felzenszwalb General object detection with deformable part-based models.
Steerable Part Models Hamed Pirsiavash and Deva Ramanan
Proportion Priors for Image Sequence Segmentation Claudia Nieuwenhuis, etc. ICCV 2013 Oral.
Abandoned Object Detection for Public Surveillance Video Student: Wei-Hao Tung Advisor: Jia-Shung Wang Dept. of Computer Science National Tsing Hua University.
Robust Object Tracking via Sparsity-based Collaborative Model
2D Human Pose Estimation in TV Shows Vittorio Ferrari Manuel Marin Andrew Zisserman Dagstuhl Seminar July 2008.
Enhancing Exemplar SVMs using Part Level Transfer Regularization 1.
Groups of Adjacent Contour Segments for Object Detection Vittorio Ferrari Loic Fevrier Frederic Jurie Cordelia Schmid.
Ghunhui Gu, Joseph J. Lim, Pablo Arbeláez, Jitendra Malik University of California at Berkeley Berkeley, CA
Detecting Pedestrians by Learning Shapelet Features
More sliding window detection: Discriminative part-based models Many slides based on P. FelzenszwalbP. Felzenszwalb.
Recognition using Regions CVPR Outline Introduction Overview of the Approach Experimental Results Conclusion.
Poselets Michael Krainin CSE 590V Oct 18, Person Detection Dalal and Triggs ‘05 – Learn to classify pedestrians vs. background – HOG + linear SVM.
Real-time Embedded Face Recognition for Smart Home Fei Zuo, Student Member, IEEE, Peter H. N. de With, Senior Member, IEEE.
1 Learning to Detect Objects in Images via a Sparse, Part-Based Representation S. Agarwal, A. Awan and D. Roth IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and.
Generic Object Detection using Feature Maps Oscar Danielsson Stefan Carlsson
Robust Real-time Object Detection by Paul Viola and Michael Jones ICCV 2001 Workshop on Statistical and Computation Theories of Vision Presentation by.
Spatial Pyramid Pooling in Deep Convolutional
On the Object Proposal Presented by Yao Lu
A Vision-Based System that Detects the Act of Smoking a Cigarette Xiaoran Zheng, University of Nevada-Reno, Dept. of Computer Science Dr. Mubarak Shah,
FACE DETECTION AND RECOGNITION By: Paranjith Singh Lohiya Ravi Babu Lavu.
Generic object detection with deformable part-based models
CS55 Tianfan Xue Adviser: Bo Zhang, Jianmin Li.
EADS DS / SDC LTIS Page 1 7 th CNES/DLR Workshop on Information Extraction and Scene Understanding for Meter Resolution Image – 29/03/07 - Oberpfaffenhofen.
Shape-Based Human Detection and Segmentation via Hierarchical Part- Template Matching Zhe Lin, Member, IEEE Larry S. Davis, Fellow, IEEE IEEE TRANSACTIONS.
A General Framework for Tracking Multiple People from a Moving Camera
Professor: S. J. Wang Student : Y. S. Wang
“Secret” of Object Detection Zheng Wu (Summer intern in MSRNE) Sep. 3, 2010 Joint work with Ce Liu (MSRNE) William T. Freeman (MIT) Adam Kalai (MSRNE)
Window-based models for generic object detection Mei-Chen Yeh 04/24/2012.
Marco Pedersoli, Jordi Gonzàlez, Xu Hu, and Xavier Roca
Object Detection with Discriminatively Trained Part Based Models
Pedestrian Detection and Localization
Deformable Part Model Presenter : Liu Changyu Advisor : Prof. Alex Hauptmann Interest : Multimedia Analysis April 11 st, 2013.
BING: Binarized Normed Gradients for Objectness Estimation at 300fps
Deformable Part Models (DPM) Felzenswalb, Girshick, McAllester & Ramanan (2010) Slides drawn from a tutorial By R. Girshick AP 12% 27% 36% 45% 49% 2005.
Tracking People by Learning Their Appearance Deva Ramanan David A. Forsuth Andrew Zisserman.
Stable Multi-Target Tracking in Real-Time Surveillance Video
Efficient Visual Object Tracking with Online Nearest Neighbor Classifier Many slides adapt from Steve Gu.
Histograms of Oriented Gradients for Human Detection(HOG)
Human Detection Method Combining HOG and Cumulative Sum based Binary Pattern Jong Gook Ko', Jin Woo Choi', So Hee Park', Jang Hee You', ' Electronics and.
CS 1699: Intro to Computer Vision Detection II: Deformable Part Models Prof. Adriana Kovashka University of Pittsburgh November 12, 2015.
Object Detection Overview Viola-Jones Dalal-Triggs Deformable models Deep learning.
Hand Gesture Recognition Using Haar-Like Features and a Stochastic Context-Free Grammar IEEE 高裕凱 陳思安.
Week 10 Emily Hand UNR.
Object Recognizing. Object Classes Individual Recognition.
Coherent Scene Understanding with 3D Geometric Reasoning Jiyan Pan 12/3/2012.
A REAL-TIME DEFORMABLE DETECTOR 謝汝欣 OUTLINE  Introduction  Related Work  Proposed Method  Experiments 2.
Multi-view Traffic Sign Detection, Recognition and 3D Localisation Radu Timofte, Karel Zimmermann, and Luc Van Gool.
More sliding window detection: Discriminative part-based models
A Discriminatively Trained, Multiscale, Deformable Part Model Yeong-Jun Cho Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,2008.
Fine-grained Fine-grained Recognition( 细粒度分类 ) 沈志强.
Recent developments in object detection
Object detection with deformable part-based models
Yun-FuLiu Jing-MingGuo Che-HaoChang
Object Localization Goal: detect the location of an object within an image Fully supervised: Training data labeled with object category and ground truth.
Object detection as supervised classification
R-CNN region By Ilia Iofedov 11/11/2018 BGU, DNN course 2016.
Cheng-Ming Huang, Wen-Hung Liao Department of Computer Science
A Tutorial on HOG Human Detection
An HOG-LBP Human Detector with Partial Occlusion Handling
Progress report 2019/1/14 PHHung.
Outline Background Motivation Proposed Model Experimental Results
Presentation transcript:

Student: Yao-Sheng Wang Advisor: Prof. Sheng-Jyh Wang ARTICULATED HUMAN DETECTION 1 Department of Electronics Engineering National Chiao Tung University Hsinchu, Taiwan 1

 Introduction  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 2

 Introduction  Motivation  Challenge  Representative Works  Potential Problems  Target  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 3

 Why we care about human detection?  We are human beings!  Wide range of applications:  Automotive safety  Surveillance system  Indoor care  Crime alert  Human-Computer Interface … etc. 4 MOTIVATION

 Introduction  Motivation  Challenge  Representative Works  Potential Problems  Target  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 5

 What makes human detection so difficult?  Illumination condition  Cluttered background  Change of viewpoints  Occlusion  Wearing difference  Diversity of human  Pose variation 6 CHALLENGE

 What makes human detection so difficult?  Illumination condition  Cluttered background  Change of viewpoints  Occlusion  Wearing difference  Diversity of human  Pose variation 7 CHALLENGE

 What makes human detection so difficult?  Illumination condition  Cluttered background  Change of viewpoints  Occlusion  Wearing difference  Diversity of human  Pose variation 8 CHALLENGE

 What makes human detection so difficult?  Illumination condition  Cluttered background  Change of viewpoints  Occlusion  Wearing difference  Diversity of human  Pose variation 9 CHALLENGE

 Progress on “Machine Learning” technology  Handle more general and complicate cases.  Definition:  “Articulated Human Detection”. 10 CHALLENGE

 Introduction  Motivation  Challenge  Representative Works  Potential Problems  Target  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 11

 Deformable Part Model  Root filter (mask).  Part filter (mask).  Penalty function. 12 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS (I) [P. Felzenszwalb, D. McAllester, and D. Ramanan. A discriminatively trained, multi-scale, deformable part model. In CVPR, 2008.]

 Pose-let: 13 REPRESENTATIVE WORKS (II) [Lubomir Bourdev, Jitendra Malik. Poselets: Body Part Detectors Trained Using 3D Human Pose Annotations. In ICCV, 2009.]..

 Introduction  Motivation  Challenge  Representative Works  Potential Problems  Target  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 14

 Problems:  System complexity increased with the complexity of human poses.  More detectors needed.  Exhaustive search.  Sliding window method + Image pyramid.  Both problems leads to unacceptable speed for applications in real life. 15 POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

 Introduction  Motivation  Challenge  Representative Works  Potential Problems  Target  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 16

 Target in the thesis:  Propose a detection scheme with acceptable detection speed in dealing with highly intra- class variation from the change of pose and viewpoint. 17 TARGET

 Introduction  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 18

 Better features:  Cheap to compute and capture crucial information at the same time. Ex: HOG.  Better classifiers:  Linear classifiers.  Ex: Adaboost, Linear-SVM and Random-forests.  Better prior knowledge:  Ex: Information about ground plane. 19 RELATED WORKS

 Cascades:  Cascade the part filters to reduce the searching regions. 20 RELATED WORKS [P. Felzenszwalb, R. Girshick, D. McAllester. Cascade Object Detection with Deformable Part Models. In CVPR, 2010.]

 Discard non-promising hypotheses.  Class-dependent:  Branch and bound. (CVPR, 2008)  Class-independent:  What is an object? (CVPR, 2010)  Closure boundary, different appearance or salience.  Segmentation as selective search. (ICCV, 2011) 21 RELATED WORKS

 Feature response approximation:  Feature approximation in testing step.  Feature approximation in training step. 22 RELATED WORKS [R. Benenson, M. Mathias, R. Timofte, and L. Van Gool. Pedestrian detection at 100 frames per second. In CVPR, 2012.] [P. Dollár, S. Belongie, P. Perona. The fastest pedestrian detector in the west. In BMVC, 2010.]

 Introduction  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 23

 Recall the memory of the first problem:  System complexity increased with the complexity of human poses (include variation of viewpoints).  How can we break the relation between the complexity of system and the one of human poses?  Choose stable features or body parts for detection. 24 IDEA

 Better prior knowledge: 25 IDEA

 Recall the memory of the second problem:  Exhaustive search.  “Sliding Window” + “Image Pyramid”.  How can we reduce the searching region?  Detect the common feature among these parts.  Use the cumulative characteristic of the feature to handle the variation of scale. 26 IDEA

 Common feature  Body parts consist of combination of two edge segments.  Cumulative characteristic  Edge detector with fixed size + Combination. 27 IDEA

 The previous works focus on reducing the searching regions.  Specifically against “Exhaustive Search”.  Our method starts from breaking the relation between complexity of system and that of poses. Then, use the common feature and cumulative characteristic to cut down the searching space. 28 COMPARISON

 Introduction  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 29

30 SYSTEM BLOCK  Bottom-up system:

31 SYSTEM BLOCK  Bottom-up system:

 Steps:  Detection of edge candidates.  Production of part candidates.  Refinement of part candidates. 32 FAST PART DETECTION

 Detection and combination of segments (9 orientations). 33 DETECTION OF PART CANDIDATES

 Constraints on combination of edges.  Orientation, length ratio and color symmetry. 34 PRODUCTION OF PART CANDIDATES Neighbor orientation consideration

 HOG feature + Random forest training 35 REFINEMENT OF PART CANDIDATES Feature = [Length Orientation HOG_features] feature134 feature33feature2 ? ? feature400

36 SYSTEM BLOCK  Bottom-up system:

 Problem:  No information about the classes of the limbs due to the low resolution of images or variation from hand gestures or appearance of shoes...etc.  Need another step to refine the combinations.  What information left?  Head-shoulder or head-torso. 37 PART COMBINATION

 Any possibility for us to estimate the position and orientation of head-torso based on the architecture of current combinations? 38 PART COMBINATION

39 PART COMBINATION

40 PART COMBINATION

 Conclusion for the clues mentioned in the previous slide.  Too complicate to combine the parts for the whole body.  Start from low-level combination of parts to reveal the benefits of physical constraints.  Break the problems into two levels.  Low-level combination.  High-level combination. 41 PART COMBINATION

 How far can we reach for low-level combination?  4-parts combination = lower body. 42 LOW-LEVEL COMBINATION

 False alarm exists.  Joints relative position + Random Forest 43 LOW-LEVEL COMBINATION feature134 feature33feature2 ? ? feature400

44 HIGH-LEVEL COMBINATION

45 SYSTEM BLOCK  Bottom-up system:

 Pose prediction.  Detection with DPM detector. 46 COMBINATION REFINEMENT

 Feature:  Relative size ratio and positions between low- level combinations and architecture of each low-level combination.  Random Forest. 47 POSE PREDICTION

 Use DPM detector to cover the intra-class variation.  Model: 48 DETECTION WITH DPM DETECTOR

 Much stronger than information of limbs.  Head-shoulder to head-torso.  Start from head-torso to combine limbs back. 49 USAGE OF HEAD-SHOULDER INFORMATION

50 SYSTEM ILLUSTRATION

 Introduction  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 51

 Introduction  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 52

 Introduction  Related Works  Idea  Proposed Method  Experimental Results  Conclusion  Reference OUTLINE 53