2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.neucom.2014.05.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Random Gabor based templates for facial expression recognition in images with facial occlusion

Abstract: Robust facial expression recognition (FER) under occluded face conditions is challenging. It requires robust algorithms of feature extraction and investigations into the effects of different types of occlusion on the recognition performance to gain insight. Previous FER studies in this area have been limited. They have spanned recovery strategies for loss of local texture information and testing limited to only a few types of occlusion and predominantly a matched train-test strategy. This paper proposes a robu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
33
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 86 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Methods [6], [25], [28] and [35] proposed different approaches for solving this problem. Our potential solution consists of excluding the occluded facial region in the feature extraction process.…”
Section: Comparison With Previous Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Methods [6], [25], [28] and [35] proposed different approaches for solving this problem. Our potential solution consists of excluding the occluded facial region in the feature extraction process.…”
Section: Comparison With Previous Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The system showed robustness to changes in parameters of Gabor filters and template sizes. The work [Zhang, et al 2011], [Zhang, et al 2014b] adopted features extracted from a large number of random local patches to overcome facial occlusion, while another commonly used way is to extract features from a set of facial sub-regions. Guo and Ruan [2011] used a sum function to combine Local Binary Covariance Matrices (LBCM) features from nine equally sized facial sub-regions.…”
Section: Feature Fusion Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…LGBP [Azmi and Yegane 2012] 95.6 89.1(-6.5) 97.8(+2.2) 89.1(-6.5) 95(-0.6) --Bayesian [Miyakoshi and Kato 2011] 78.1 78.1(-0) 56.3(-21.8) ----SA CK Gabor [Kotsia, et al 2008] 93 88.5(-4.5) 87.4(-5.6) ----DNMF [Kotsia, et al 2008] 90.4 89.3(-1.1) 88.7(-1.7) ----SVM [Kotsia, et al 2008] 89.5 86.7(-2.8) 82.8(-6.7) ----GSNMF [Zhi, et al 2011] 95. [Kotsia, et al 2008] 86.7 84.2(-2.5) 82.9(-3.8) ----SVM [Kotsia, et al 2008] 91.4 88.4(-3) 86.7(-4.7) ----CFDWL [Huang, et al 2012] 93.2 93(-0.2) 79.1(-14.1) -73.5(-19.7) -86.8(-6.4) Gabor [Zhang, et al 2014b] 95.3 95.1(-0.2) 90.8(-4.5) ---75 (-20.3) MCC [Buciu, et al 2005] 93.6 87.2(-6.4) 92.3(-1.3) ----PCA [Towner and Slater 2007] 75, 85 --70(-5) 82(-3) --SRC [Ouyang, et al 2013] 97.7 72.4(-25.3) -----…”
Section: Jaffementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pose: The images of a face vary due to the relative camera-face pose (frontal, 45 degree, profile, upside down), and some facial features changes due to the partial or whole occlusion of the image [7,3].…”
Section: Imaging Conditionsmentioning
confidence: 99%