The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2009 Twelfth IEEE International Workshop on Performance Evaluation of Tracking and Surveillance 2009
DOI: 10.1109/pets-winter.2009.5399728
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

PETS2009 and Winter-PETS 2009 results: A combined evaluation

Abstract: This paper presents the results of the crowd image analysis challenge of the Winter PETS 2009 workshop. The evaluation is carried out using a selection of the metrics developed in the Video Analysis and Content Extraction (VACE) program and the CLassification of Events, Activities, and Relationships (CLEAR) consortium [13]. The evaluation highlights the detection and tracking performance of the authors' systems in areas such as precision, accuracy and robustness. The performance is also compared to the PETS 20… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
53
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
53
0
Order By: Relevance
“…And, yet, it has been shown to outperform many state-of-theart methods on the PETS'09 data set [45]. Its main limitation is that, because it does not exploit appearance, it cannot prevent identity switches when people come close to each other.…”
Section: Multiple Target Trackingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…And, yet, it has been shown to outperform many state-of-theart methods on the PETS'09 data set [45]. Its main limitation is that, because it does not exploit appearance, it cannot prevent identity switches when people come close to each other.…”
Section: Multiple Target Trackingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We use the publicly available PETS'09 3 dataset, for which the performance of other algorithms has been published [45]. More specifically, we tested our method on the 800-frame sequence S2/L1, which is filmed by 7 cameras at 7 fps, and features 10 people.…”
Section: Pedestrians -Pets'09mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In our e xperiments, we used four camera v iews (view 1,5,6,8) and co mpared our detection results with POM [10], wh ich is one of the top-performers in W inter-PETS2009 [15] (the evaluation results of POM on the PETS09 S2L1 dataset come fro m [6]). We also co mpare our method with the method in [6], one of the latest results on this dataset.…”
Section: Experiments Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We evaluate our algorithm on the PETS2009 dataset [26], a challenging benchmark dataset for multiview crowd image analysis containing outdoor sequences with varying crowd densities and activities. We tested on two tasks: crowd detection in a sparse crowd (sequence S2L1-1234) and crowd counting in a dense crowd (sequence S1L1-1357).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We compared our detection results against the ASEF method, which is a detection method using convolution of learned average of synthetic exact filters [5], and the POM+LP method, which is a multi-target detection and tracking algorithm based on a probabilistic occupancy map and linear programming [24]. We chose these two methods because they are the current top-performers as reported in Winter-PETS2009 [26]. We also compared against the Cascade [8] and Part-based [9] person detectors, trained according to [5].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%