2017
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-56538-5_44
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Algorithms for People Recognition in Digital Images: A Systematic Review and Testing

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this section, a set of relevant studies will be presented in chronological order from the oldest to the most recent. In 2017, Intriago-Pazmiño et al [9] presents a comprehensive evaluation of works published in the last decade and identify, implement, and test the most-used and best-rated algorithms. A feature extraction approach similar to Histograms of Oriented Gradients (HOG) as well as two classification algorithms, AdaBoost and Support Vector Machine(SVM), have been discovered by us.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this section, a set of relevant studies will be presented in chronological order from the oldest to the most recent. In 2017, Intriago-Pazmiño et al [9] presents a comprehensive evaluation of works published in the last decade and identify, implement, and test the most-used and best-rated algorithms. A feature extraction approach similar to Histograms of Oriented Gradients (HOG) as well as two classification algorithms, AdaBoost and Support Vector Machine(SVM), have been discovered by us.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Accuracy SVM-HOG [9] 96.00 Adaboost-HOG [9] 72.00 Xiao and Liu [10] 91.00 CNN [11] 96.00 Gajjar et al [19] 91.4 CNN-MufHAS [21] 99.80 Proposed 100.00…”
Section: Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Detection Accuracy HOG [3] 67.76% Adaboost [61] 72.23% SVM-HOG [62] 78.93% Adaboost-HOG [62] 85.14% R-FCN [59] 86.31% YOLO [9] 88.73% Fast R-CNN [60] 90.38% Ours 91.4% Figure 10: Results of different detection Brussels dataset using standard evaluation settings.…”
Section: Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Detection Accuracy HOG [3] 67.76% Adaboost [61] 72.23% SVM-HOG [62] 78.93% Adaboost-HOG [62] 85.14% R-FCN [59] 86.31% YOLO [9] 88.73% Fast R-CNN [60] 90.38% Ours 91.4% To further improve the detection performance, we perform ablation experiments. Using both the dataset's training images; we trained the network and tested the model on test images of the individual dataset.…”
Section: Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%