2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2017.11.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On prediction error compressive sensing image reconstruction for face recognition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This information is then used to guide compression. The method [41] examines the recognition of a remote face recognition (FR) scheme in the framework of compact image recognition (CS). Error images are obtained as the difference between the original and predicted images, using various predictors such as Autoencoder that provide compact measurements.…”
Section: -Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This information is then used to guide compression. The method [41] examines the recognition of a remote face recognition (FR) scheme in the framework of compact image recognition (CS). Error images are obtained as the difference between the original and predicted images, using various predictors such as Autoencoder that provide compact measurements.…”
Section: -Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In terms of the recognition rates, Ours outperformed the state-ofthe-art methods, including hand-crafted features and deep features techniques. Also, our WSBP was better than Multi-resolution dictionary [30] (82.19%), MNTCDP [21] (96.18%), Local Multiple Patterns [49] (98.00%), or even deep facial features CS [2] (93.99%) by a substantial margin. The remaining algorithms, including EL-LBP [44] (98.27%) and deep feature FDDL + CNN [39] (98%) were comparable with our descriptors, and yet ours prevailed.…”
Section: Evaluation With Gray-scale Imagesmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The average recognition rates from the different methods were shown in Table 12. Here, we fine-tuned the structuring element B 2 = { (1,5); (2,6)} to obtain the best achievements for WSBP 99.03 Görgel et al [13] 97.50 and CLBP S M(m 1 , μ 2 ). This structuring element made our descriptors more robust against noise and occlusion comparing to other methods.…”
Section: Robustness Against Degraded Imagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result of this information, compression is guided. This method [40] examines the recognition of remote face recognition (FR) schemes within the framework of compact image recognition (CS). Using predictors such as autoencoder that provide compact measurements, error images can be obtained as the difference between original and predicted images.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%