Cited by 78Video Surveillance and Tracking MethodsInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesVideo Coding and Compression Technologies

Moving object detection based on frame difference and W4

Sengar, Sandeep Singh, Mukhopadhyay, Susanta·2017·Signal Image and Video Processing

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11760-017-1093-8

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In [72], the proposed method improved accuracy by 2% to 4% compared with inter-frame and three-frame difference methods across three datasets.

    “The findings revealed that, in various environments, the proposed method exhibited an improvement in accuracy ranging from 2% to 4% when contrasted with the inter-frame and three-frame difference methods.”

    From A Survey of Video Surveillance Systems in Smart City (2023) · cites this paper as [72]

  • In [72], variations in accuracy were influenced by the distance between the camera and the object being tracked and by the speed of the object's movement.

    “These variations in accuracy were influenced by factors such as the distance between the camera and the object being tracked, as well as the speed of the object's movement.”

    From A Survey of Video Surveillance Systems in Smart City (2023) · cites this paper as [72]

  • In [72], the highest accuracy was achieved in tracking people during meetings, and the least accurate results were in tracking traffic.

    “Notably, the highest accuracy was achieved in tracking people during meetings, while the least accurate results were observed in the context of tracking traffic.”

    From A Survey of Video Surveillance Systems in Smart City (2023) · cites this paper as [72]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sengar, S. S., & Mukhopadhyay, S.
Affiliations
Indian Institute of Technology Dhanbad (IN)
Corresponding author
Sengar, Sandeep Singh
Venue
Signal Image and Video Processing
Published
2017-04-17
Volume
11
Issue
7
Pages
1357-1364
ISSN
  • 1863-1703 (ISSN-L)
  • 1863-1711
OpenAlex
W2605847739
Cited by
78
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Signal Image and Video Processing (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Video Surveillance and Tracking Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Infrared Target Detection Methodologies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Video Coding and Compression Technologies
Keywords
moving object detection, frame difference, video surveillance, foreground segmentation, ghosting, connected component labeling, morphological operations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review