2014 International Conference on Electronics and Communication Systems (ICECS) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/ecs.2014.6892662
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Face detection and recognition with video database

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
1
1
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To learn blur-robust face representations the authors artificially blur training data composed of clear still images to account for a shortfall in real-world video training data. Finally, (Yadhul et al, 2014) reduce the computational complexity in face detection and improve the accuracy rate of face recognition in video datasets. The Viola-Jones algorithm is used for face detection.…”
Section: 60%mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To learn blur-robust face representations the authors artificially blur training data composed of clear still images to account for a shortfall in real-world video training data. Finally, (Yadhul et al, 2014) reduce the computational complexity in face detection and improve the accuracy rate of face recognition in video datasets. The Viola-Jones algorithm is used for face detection.…”
Section: 60%mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To get a clearer picture in Table 13 we present the achieved accuracies of all 150 analyzed papers. (Schroff et al, 2015) LFW 99.63% (Schroff et al, 2015) YTF 95.12% (Taigman et al, 2015) LFW 95.17% (Syafeeza et al, 2015) ORL 100.00% (Jalali et al, 2015) FERET 88.80%-92.00% (Huang and Yuan, 2015) FERET 97.40% (Sun et al, 2015a) LFW 99.47% (Sun et al, 2015a) YTF 93.20% (Yadhul et al, 2014) YTCD 97.09% (Zhang et al, 2016) ORL 93.33% (Simón et al, 2016) RGB-D-T face / (Sun et al, 2013) LFW 93.83% (Peng et al, 2016) CASIA NIR 96.02%-100.00% (Herrmann et al, 2016) YTF 80.30% (Li and Zhu, 2016) YTF 94.56%-98.43% (Vizilter et al, 2016) LFW 96.30%-98.59% (Zheng et al, 2016) CASIA-WebFace 96.40%-97.90% (Guo et al, 2016a) ORL 97.50% (Singh and Om, 2017) IIT(BHU) 86.22%-91.03% (Guo et al, 2017) SunWin Face 80.34%-99.26% (Guo et al, 2017) LFW 98.95% (Guo et al, 2017) HIT LAB2 89.80%-98.74% (Guo et al, 2017) YTF 97.30% (Hu et al, 2017) AT&T 91.25%-95.00% (Hu et al, 2017) FRGCv2.0 85.15% (Fu et al, 2017) LFW 84.10%-97.10% (Bukovčiková et al, 2017) CelebA 85.74% (Liu et al, 2017 (Zeng et al, 2017) AR face Set 1 88.30%-100.00% (Zeng et al, 2017) AR face Set 2 76.30%-99.80% (Gruber et al, 2017) Casia-WebFace 90.70%-91.50% (Yeung et al, 2017) LFW 83.40% (Kim et al, 2017) custom dataset 96.70% (Reale et al, 2017) CASIA HFB 99.52% (Reale et al, 2017) CASIA NIR-VIS 2.0.…”
Section: Assessment Of Q5: What Is the Accuracy Of Cnns For Facial Re...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The work requires initialization the algorithms by inputting initial estimates of the scene. [5] introduced the possibility of using the image sensor as luminance sensor. The illumination level determined the amount of lighting needed to maintain the contrast in the overall view of objects in the shop window under external natural illumination.…”
Section: Prelated Workmentioning
confidence: 99%