Crowd video monitoring and analysis is a hot topic in computer vision and public management. The pre-evaluation of crowd safety is beneficial to the prediction of crowd status to avoid the occurrence of catastrophic events. This paper proposes a method to evaluate crowd safety based on fuzzy inference. Pedestrian’s number and distribution uniformity are considered in a fuzzy inference system as two kinds of attributes of a crowd. Firstly, the pedestrian’s number is estimated by the number of foreground pixels. Then, the distribution uniformity of a crowd is calculated using distribution entropy by dividing the monitoring scene into several small areas. Furthermore, through the fuzzy operation, the fuzzy system is constructed by using two input variables (pedestrian’s number and distribution entropy) and one output variable (crowd safety status). Finally, inference rules between the crowd safety state and the pedestrian’s number and distribution uniformity are constructed to obtain the pre-evaluation of the safety state of the crowd. Three video sequences extracted from different scenes are used in the experiment. Experimental results show that the proposed method can be used to evaluate the safety status of the crowd in a monitoring scene.
Prompts have been the center of progress in advancing language models' zero-shot and fewshot performance. However, recent work finds that models can perform surprisingly well when given intentionally irrelevant or misleading prompts. Such results may be interpreted as evidence that model behavior is not "human like". In this study, we challenge a central assumption in such work: that humans would perform badly when given pathological instructions. We find that humans are able to reliably ignore irrelevant instructions and thus, like models, perform well on the underlying task despite an apparent lack of signal regarding the task they are being asked to do. However, when given deliberately misleading instructions, humans follow the instructions faithfully, whereas models do not. Thus, our conclusion is mixed with respect to prior work. We argue against the earlier claim that high performance with irrelevant prompts constitutes evidence against models' instruction understanding, but we reinforce the claim that models' failure to follow misleading instructions raises concerns. More broadly, we caution that future research should not idealize human behaviors as a monolith and should not train or evaluate models to mimic assumptions about these behaviors without first validating humans' behaviors empirically.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.