Comparing Shape and Temporal PDMs

  • Ezra Tassone
  • Geoff West
  • Svetha Venkatesh
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2396)

Abstract

The Point Distribution Model (PDM) has been successfully used in representing sets of static and moving images. A recent extension to the PDM for moving objects, the temporal PDM, has been proposed. This utilises quantities such as velocity and acceleration to more explicitly consider the characteristics of the movement and the sequencing of the changes in shape that occur. This research aims to compare the two types of model based on a series of arm movements, and to examine the characteristics of both approaches.

Keywords

Shape Model Temporal Model Error Matrix Motion Component Landmark Point 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    T. F. Cootes, C. J. Taylor, D. H. Cooper, and J. Graham. Training models of shape from sets of examples. In Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference, Leeds, UK, pages 9–18. Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. F. Cootes and C. J. Taylor. Active shape models-’ smart snakes’. In Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference, Leeds, UK, pages 266–275. Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. M. Baumberg and D. C. Hogg. An efficient method of contour tracking using Active Shape Models. In 1994 IEEE Workshop on Motion of Non-rigid and Articulated Objects, 1994.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Larry Davis, Vasanth Philomin, and Ramani Duraiwami. Tracking humans from a moving platform. In 15th. International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Barcelona, Spain, pages 171–178, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. R. Magee and R. D. Boyle. Spatio-temporal modeling in the farmyard domain. In Proceeding of the IAPR International Workshop on Articulated Motion and Deformable Objects, Palma de Mallorca, Spain, pages 83–95, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. D. Tillett, C. M. Onyango, and J. A. Marchant. Using model-based image processing to track animal movements. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 17:249–261, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tony Heap and David Hogg. Extending the Point Distribution Model using polar coordinates. Image and Vision Computing, 14:589–599, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    T. F. Cootes, G. J. Edwards, and C. J. Taylor. Active appearance models. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision, volume 2, pages 484–498, 1998.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    N. Sumpter, R. D. Boyle, and R. D. Tillett. Modelling collective animal behaviour using extended Point Distribution Models. In Proceedings of the British Machine Vision Conference, Colchester, UK. BMVA Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ezra Tassone, Geoff West, and Svetha Venkatesh. Classifying complex human motion using point distribution models. In 5th Asian Conference on Computer Vision, Melbourne, Australia, 2002.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. C. Gower. Generalized Procrustes Analysis. Psychometrika, 40(1):33–51, March 1975.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    William H. Press, Saul A. Teukolsky, William T. Vetterling, and Brian P. Flannery. Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing. Cambridge University Press, second edition, 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ezra Tassone
    • 1
  • Geoff West
    • 1
  • Svetha Venkatesh
    • 1
  1. 1.School of ComputingCurtin University of TechnologyPerth

Personalised recommendations