The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gauss-Newton Deformable Part Models for Face Alignment In-the-Wild
Open accessAbstract
Arguably, Deformable Part Models (DPMs) are one of the most prominent approaches for face alignment with impressive results being recently reported for both controlled lab and unconstrained settings. Fitting in most DPM methods is typically formulated as a two-step process during which discriminatively trained part templates are first correlated with the image to yield a filter response for each landmark and then shape optimization is performed over these filter responses. This process, although computationally efficient, is based on fixed part templates which are assumed to be independent, and has been shown to result in imperfect filter responses and detection ambiguities. To address this limitation, in this paper, we propose to jointly optimize a part-based, trained in-the-wild, flexible appearance model along with a global shape model which results in a joint translational motion model for the model parts via Gauss-Newton (GN) optimization. We show how significant computational reductions can be achieved by building a full model during training but then efficiently optimizing the proposed cost function on a sparse grid using weighted least-squares during fitting. We coin the proposed formulation Gauss-Newton Deformable Part Model (GN-DPM). Finally, we compare its performance against the state-of-the-art and show that the proposed GN-DPM outperforms it, in some cases, by a large margin. Code for our method is available from http://ibug.doc.ic.ac.uk/resources.
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
Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints
Lowe, D. G. (2004) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1023/b:visi.0000029664.99615.94 · Cited by 55,589
Histograms of Oriented Gradients for Human Detection
Dalal, N., & Triggs, B. (2005) · 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2005.177 · Cited by 33,584
Object Detection with Discriminatively Trained Part-Based Models
Felzenszwalb, P. F., Girshick, R. B., McAllester, D., & Ramanan, D. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2009.167 · Cited by 9,853
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
Constrained Local Neural Fields for Robust Facial Landmark Detection in the Wild
Baltrusaitis, T., Robinson, P., & Morency, L.-P. (2013) · 2013 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops · doi:10.1109/iccvw.2013.54 · Cited by 415
Cited by
Ranjan, R., Patel, V. M., & Chellappa, R. (2019) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2017.2781233 · Cited by 1,333
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
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tzimiropoulos, G., & Pantic, M.
- Venue
- 2014 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2014-06
- Pages
- 1851-1858
- ISSN
- 1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2130563197
- Cited by
- 215
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 23.25
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.