The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Generic vs. person specific active appearance models
Abstract
Active Appearance Models (AAMs) are generative parametric models that have been successfully used in the past to model faces. Anecdotal evidence, however, suggests that the performance of an AAM built to model the variation in appearance of a single person across pose, illumination, and expression (a Person Specific AAM) is substantially better than the performance of an AAM built to model the variation in appearance of many faces, including unseen subjects not in the training set (a Generic AAM). In this paper, we present an empirical evaluation that shows that Person Specific AAMs are, as expected, both easier to build and more robust to fit than Generic AAMs. Moreover, we show that: (1) building a generic shape model is far easier than building a generic appearance model, and (2) the shape component is the main cause of the reduced fitting robustness of Generic AAMs. We then proceed to describe two refinements to Generic AAMs to improve their performance: (1) a refitting procedure to improve the quality of the ground-truth data used to build the AAM and (2) a new fitting algorithm. For both refinements we demonstrate dramatically improved fitting performance. Finally, we evaluate the effect of these improvements on a combined model construction and fitting task.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Cootes, T. F., Edwards, G. J., & Taylor, C. J. (2001) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.927467 · Cited by 5,409
Efficient region tracking with parametric models of geometry and illumination
Hager, G. D., & Belhumeur, P. N. (1998) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/34.722606 · Cited by 1,066
Cited by
Face Alignment at 3000 FPS via Regressing Local Binary Features
Ren, S., Cao, X., Wei, Y., & Sun, J. (2014) · 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2014.218 · Cited by 853
Automatic Analysis of Facial Affect: A Survey of Registration, Representation, and Recognition
Sariyanidi, E., Gunes, H., & Cavallaro, A. (2015) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2014.2366127 · Cited by 685
300 Faces In-The-Wild Challenge: Database and results
Sagonas, C., Antonakos, E., Tzimiropoulos, G., Zafeiriou, S., & Pantic, M. (2016) · Image and Vision Computing · doi:10.1016/j.imavis.2016.01.002 · Cited by 638
Random Forests for Real Time 3D Face Analysis
Fanelli, G., Dantone, M., Gall, J., Fossati, A., & Van Gool, L. (2013) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-012-0549-0 · Cited by 566
Koller, O., Forster, J., & Ney, H. (2015) · Computer Vision and Image Understanding · doi:10.1016/j.cviu.2015.09.013 · Cited by 533
Metadata
- Authors
- Gross, R., Matthews, I., & Baker, S.
- Venue
- Image and Vision Computing
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-11
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1080-1093
- ISSN
- 0262-8856 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2171262059
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 23.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Generic vs. person specific active appearance models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.imavis.2005.07.009
- The paper
- Gross, R., Matthews, I., & Baker, S. (2005). Generic vs. person specific active appearance models. Image and Vision Computing. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imavis.2005.07.009
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.