2002
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-47979-1_8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning a Sparse Representation for Object Detection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
371
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 359 publications
(371 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
371
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For human detection, we trained a 128 × 64 model using INRIA person dataset as described in [7]. For car detection, we trained a 40 × 100 model using UIUC [1] and Darmstadt [15] sets together totalling 602 car side views. The model trained for van detection is 40 × 100 as well.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…For human detection, we trained a 128 × 64 model using INRIA person dataset as described in [7]. For car detection, we trained a 40 × 100 model using UIUC [1] and Darmstadt [15] sets together totalling 602 car side views. The model trained for van detection is 40 × 100 as well.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 1 summarizes the result of the comparison, where we see that the mean score (also minimum, maximum and quartiles) for the proposed approach is higher than that of regular HOG window. For synthetic car images, 602 perspective car images from UIUC [1] and Darmstadt [15] datasets are projected to omnidirectional images. 40×100 pixel regular HOG computation and the proposed non-rectangular HOG window are compared in Table 2.…”
Section: Evaluation Of the Proposed Hog Computation Using Synthetic Omentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This parallel has been exploited in recent bag-of-keypoints approaches to visual categorization [6,27], unsupervised discovery of visual "topics" [24], and video retrieval [23]. More generally, representations based on local image features, or salient regions extracted by specialized interest operators, have shown promise for recognizing textures [13], different views of the same object [9,22], and different instances of the same object class [1,7,8,26]. For textures, appearance-based descriptors of salient local regions are clustered to form characteristic texture elements, or textons.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast, object recognition based on dense local "invariant" image features have shown a lot of success recently [8,11,14,19,1,3,6,16,7] for objects with large withinclass variability in shape and appearance. In such approaches objects are modeled as a collection of parts or local features and the recognition is based on inferring object class based on similarity in parts' appearance and their spatial arrangement.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%