2013 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2013
DOI: 10.1109/cvpr.2013.235
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection Evolution with Multi-order Contextual Co-occurrence

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
52
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
52
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[5] propose a technique for exploiting contextual information from a single-category detector output. Although the method itself does not directly use inter-class information, they utilize the detections given by the contextual rescoring approach of [16].…”
Section: Evaluation and Comparison To Existing Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[5] propose a technique for exploiting contextual information from a single-category detector output. Although the method itself does not directly use inter-class information, they utilize the detections given by the contextual rescoring approach of [16].…”
Section: Evaluation and Comparison To Existing Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We evaluate results using the standard PASCAL scheme based on bounding box overlap that produces precision-recall curves and Average Precision (AP) measures, as done by [11] and [10]. State-of-the-art results on this dataset involve improved features (irregular HOG grids, additional channels, etc) [5,20] and use non-linear classifiers [5,20], deformable parts [11], or context [7]. However, we focus on rigid templates of HOG features on a regular grid [11], and linear SVM for two reasons: 1) to isolate the contribution of CDF (as opposed to additional machinery such as deformable parts, context, exemplars), 2) simple HOG features and linear SVM are still prevalent as building blocks in state-of-theart approaches (as is evident in section 1.1).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We compare with the best-performing methods as suggested by the Caltech and ETH benchmarks 2 , which report the top results of these two datasets, including VJ [34], HOG [5], DBN-Isol [24], ACF [6], ACF-Caltech [6], MultiFtr+CSS [35], MultiResC [28], Roerei [1], MOCO [3], MT-DPM [38], ChnFtrs [8], HogLbp [36], Pls [29], CrossTalk [7], LatSVM-V2 [11], MLS [22], ConvNet [30], and UDN [25]. All of these approaches detect pedestrians on static images, like our method, rather than using video motion as additional information.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%