2019
DOI: 10.1109/access.2019.2891084
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Locally Statistical Dual-Mode Background Subtraction Approach

Abstract: Due to the variety of background model in the real world, detecting changes in a video cannot be addressed exhaustively by a simple background subtraction method, especially with several motion detection challenges, such as dynamic background, camera jitter, intermittent object motion, and so on. In this paper, we propose an efficient background subtraction method, namely locally statistical dual-mode (LSD), for detecting moving objects in video-based surveillance systems. The method includes a local intensity… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These include subsense‐based foreground detection (SuBSENSE [49]), improved foreground detection based on visual background extractor (ViBe++ [50]), motion‐based superpixel‐level‐based background estimation algorithm (STC [53]), foreground detection based on block‐based structure in dynamic scene (HVR [54]), foreground detection based on spatio‐temporal classification (SuperBE [51]), background subtraction based on the Gaussian mixture model (block‐based [52]), an efficient local binary pattern for background subtraction (ESILBP [55]), dual‐target non‐parametric background modelling method‐based foreground detection (DTNBM [56]), and background subtraction based on local intensity pattern comparison algorithm (SBS [57]). The performance parameters (recall, precision, and f‐measure) for the HEBT method are listed in Table 5 which also includes similar results published for the referred methods by the other authors [49–57]. According to the results in Table 5, it can be easily noticed that all the performance parameters are highest for the HEBT method recall ( 0.8942 ), precision ( 0.8854 ), f‐measure ( 0.8887 ) than all the differently combined threshold‐based segmentation methods [49–57].…”
Section: Experimental Results and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These include subsense‐based foreground detection (SuBSENSE [49]), improved foreground detection based on visual background extractor (ViBe++ [50]), motion‐based superpixel‐level‐based background estimation algorithm (STC [53]), foreground detection based on block‐based structure in dynamic scene (HVR [54]), foreground detection based on spatio‐temporal classification (SuperBE [51]), background subtraction based on the Gaussian mixture model (block‐based [52]), an efficient local binary pattern for background subtraction (ESILBP [55]), dual‐target non‐parametric background modelling method‐based foreground detection (DTNBM [56]), and background subtraction based on local intensity pattern comparison algorithm (SBS [57]). The performance parameters (recall, precision, and f‐measure) for the HEBT method are listed in Table 5 which also includes similar results published for the referred methods by the other authors [49–57]. According to the results in Table 5, it can be easily noticed that all the performance parameters are highest for the HEBT method recall ( 0.8942 ), precision ( 0.8854 ), f‐measure ( 0.8887 ) than all the differently combined threshold‐based segmentation methods [49–57].…”
Section: Experimental Results and Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these comparison studies, all the thresholding methods including our own HEBT method, are implemented with the three‐frame differencing segmentation method (the one used in the work of [2]) for object detection from complex and coarse images. In another set of experimental analysis, the performance of the HEBT method (implemented with the three‐frame differencing segmentation method) is compared with several published works [49–58], which used the same datasets, i.e. CD‐2012, CD‐2014, and Wallflower, but employed different thresholding and object segmentation methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this section, the proposed method is described in detail. The background subtraction method is first developed and successfully applied in the optical video surveillance domain [18,19], a logarithm kind method can be found in [20], but such an idea is first introduced in SAR moving target detection by our team (to our knowledge) [11]. The main idea of the logarithm background subtraction method is simple.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For video object segmentation algorithms, how to define and discover the desired objects is the key problem. When the camera is static, foreground segmentation are defined as background subtraction problem [14], [50]. Papazoglou et al [30] defined the objects according to the motion cues and designed a fast strategy to estimate whether a pixel is inside the object, then the segmentation will be refined in whole video scope with appearance model and spatial constraint.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%