On Reducing the Effect of Covariate Factors in Gait Recognition: A Classifier Ensemble Method
Open accessAbstract
Robust human gait recognition is challenging because of the presence of covariate factors such as carrying condition, clothing, walking surface, etc. In this paper, we model the effect of covariates as an unknown partial feature corruption problem. Since the locations of corruptions may differ for different query gaits, relevant features may become irrelevant when walking condition changes. In this case, it is difficult to train one fixed classifier that is robust to a large number of different covariates. To tackle this problem, we propose a classifier ensemble method based on the random subspace Method (RSM) and majority voting (MV). Its theoretical basis suggests it is insensitive to locations of corrupted features, and thus can generalize well to a large number of covariates. We also extend this method by proposing two strategies, i.e, local enhancing (LE) and hybrid decision-level fusion (HDF) to suppress the ratio of false votes to true votes (before MV). The performance of our approach is competitive against the most challenging covariates like clothing, walking surface, and elapsed time. We evaluate our method on the USF dataset and OU-ISIR-B dataset, and it has much higher performance than other state-of-the-art algorithms.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Reducing the effect of contextual information improves generalisation of AI-based systems.
“Another way of improving the performance of AI-based systems is to reduce the effect of the contextual information for better generalisation120.”
From The future of sleep health: a data-driven revolution in sleep science and medicine (2020) · cites this paper as [120]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 33 · Cited by 128
- Authors
- Guan, Y., Li, C.-T., & Roli, F.
- Affiliations
- University of Warwick (GB)
- University of Cagliari (IT)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
- Published
- 2015-07-01
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1521-1528
- ISSN
- 0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
- 2160-9292
- OpenAlex
- W2091451699
- Cited by
- 128
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5
- FWCI
- 5.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (acceptedVersion)
- UNICA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Cagliari) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Charles Sturt University Research Output (CRO) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- CINECA IRIS Institutial Research Information System (University of Genoa) (submittedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Royal Society’s International Exchange Programme (IE120092)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Gait Recognition and Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Biometric Identification and Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Human Pose and Action Recognition
- Keywords
- gait recognition, covariate shift, ensemble classifiers, random subspace, majority voting, local enhancement, decision fusion, clothing variation, robustness
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Gait, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Pattern Recognition, Automated, Databases, Factual
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