2005 IEEE International Workshop on Visual Surveillance and Performance Evaluation of Tracking and Surveillance
DOI: 10.1109/vspets.2005.1570928
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of Motion Segmentation Quality for Aircraft Activity Surveillance

Abstract: Recent interest has been shown in performance evaluation of visual surveillance systems. The main purpose ofperformance evaluation on computer vision systems is the statistical testing and tuning in order to improve algorithm's reliability and robustness. In this paper we investigate the use of empirical discrepancy metrics for quantitative analysis of motion segmentation algorithms. We are concerned with the case of visual surveillance on an airport's apron, that is the area where aircrafts are parked and ser… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0
2

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
21
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The performance evaluation of the different motion detector algorithms for AVITRACK is described in more detail in [1]. It is noted that some objects are partially detected due to the achromaticity of the scene and the presence of fog causes a relatively high number of foreground pixels to be misclassified as highlighted background pixels resulting in a decrease in accuracy.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The performance evaluation of the different motion detector algorithms for AVITRACK is described in more detail in [1]. It is noted that some objects are partially detected due to the achromaticity of the scene and the presence of fog causes a relatively high number of foreground pixels to be misclassified as highlighted background pixels resulting in a decrease in accuracy.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evaluation process is described in more detail in [1]. Of these algorithms, the colour mean and variance method was selected [13], after taking into account processing efficiency and sensitivity.…”
Section: Motion Detectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…NRM is based on the pixelwise mismatches between the ground truth and the binarized image [26]. It combines the false negative rate NR FN and the false positive rate NR FP .…”
Section: Nrm (Negative Metric Rate)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The misclassification penalty metric MPM evaluates the binarization result against the ground truth on an object-by-object basis [26]:…”
Section: Mpm (Misclassification Penalty Metric)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the evaluation with these higher-level events directly targets the overall semantic interpretation of the scene. Evaluation methods on the pixel-level [1], frame-level [1,2] or object trajectory level [2,22] in contrary would only target the evaluation of sub-components of an algorithm.…”
Section: Event-based Performance Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%