2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) 2022
DOI: 10.1109/cvprw56347.2022.00297
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

YOLO-Pose: Enhancing YOLO for Multi Person Pose Estimation Using Object Keypoint Similarity Loss

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
60
0
2

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 126 publications
(62 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
60
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…This section examines the transferability of the proposed adversarial attack method to other pose estimation models, which is similar to the characteristics of black-box adversarial attacks. We select three other typical pose estimation models, which are YOLO-Pose, 40 TransPose, 41 and AlphaPose, 36 to prove the transferability of our proposed method.…”
Section: Transferability To Other Pose Estimation Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This section examines the transferability of the proposed adversarial attack method to other pose estimation models, which is similar to the characteristics of black-box adversarial attacks. We select three other typical pose estimation models, which are YOLO-Pose, 40 TransPose, 41 and AlphaPose, 36 to prove the transferability of our proposed method.…”
Section: Transferability To Other Pose Estimation Modelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We propose to predict image-space keypoints normalized by the scale. The idea is related to human/object keypoints prediction with area-normalization [34], [35] or object-sizenormalization [36], but for grasp pose estimation problem we normalize with pose proximity to camera center to introduce scale invariance. Specifically, we scale the offset which determines the proximity of keypoints.…”
Section: B Pose Estimation With Scale-normalized Keypointmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where p denotes the index of the spatial location in the bias map; i denotes the index of the category for p th location; d pi denotes the Euclidean distance between the predicted and labelled location for keypoint determined by p and i, where predicted location is (p − o pred pi ) and labelled location is (p − o gt pi ); S p denotes the scale factor of the person instance p, numerically equals to the area of person instance p; 𝜎 i denotes the standard deviation for the i th keypoint over on entire dataset, reflecting the difficulty of labelling the keypoint; h p denotes the confidence that position p is the body centroid and numerically equals to the value of position p on the centroid heat map; δ denotes the function that selects a particular h p for calculation. Unlike the OKS loss proposed in PETR [8] and YoloPose [26], we apply different weights to the L OKS at different position p. The current optimization objectives of L OKS are in line with the evaluation metrics, and with the optimization of L OKS , the network can achieve improved performance.…”
Section: Keypoint Similarity Lossmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Work [25] set different weights for keypoints in the calculation of the loss to distinguish the impact of keypoints on pose estimation. YoloPose [26] has addressed the shortcomings of non‐end‐to‐end training of heatmap‐based pose estimation methods by proposing OKS loss. These works demonstrate the importance of using scientific loss functions to improve the performance of pose estimation networks.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%