Residual vs. Inception vs. Classical Networks for Low-Resolution Face Recognition

被引:3
|
作者
Herrmann, Christian [1 ,2 ]
Willersinn, Dieter [2 ]
Beyerer, Juergen [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Karlsruhe Inst Technol KIT, Vis & Fus Lab, Karlsruhe, Germany
[2] Fraunhofer IOSB, Karlsruhe, Germany
来源
关键词
D O I
10.1007/978-3-319-59129-2_32
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
When analyzing surveillance footage, low-resolution face recognition is still a challenging task. While high-resolution face recognition experienced impressive improvements by Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) approaches, the benefit to low-resolution face recognition remains unclear as only few work has been done in this area. This paper adapts three popular high-resolution CNN designs to the low-resolution (LR) domain to find the most suitable architecture. Namely, the classical AlexNet/VGG architecture, Google's inception architecture and Microsoft's residual architecture are considered. While the inception and residual concept have been proven to be useful for very deep networks, it is shown in our case that shallower networks than for high-resolution recognition are sufficient. This leads to an advantage of the classical network architecture. Final evaluation on a downscaled version of the public YouTube Faces Database indicates a comparable performance to the high-resolution domain. Results with faces extracted from the SoBiS surveillance dataset indicate a superior performance of the trained networks in the LR domain.
引用
收藏
页码:377 / 388
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Face recognition: Encoding vs. recognition
    Pierre-Louis, J
    Azizian, A
    Staley, K
    Squires, N
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE, 2002, : 172 - 173
  • [2] Eigenfaces vs. Fisherfaces vs. ICA for Face Recognition; A Comparative Study
    Sharkas, M.
    Abou Elenien, M.
    [J]. ICSP: 2008 9TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, VOLS 1-5, PROCEEDINGS, 2008, : 914 - 919
  • [3] 'Classical vs. Quantum'
    Houghton, T
    [J]. STAND, 2003, 4-5 (4-1): : 41 - 41
  • [4] Classical Algorithm vs. Machine Learning in Objects Recognition
    Czygier, Jakub
    Tomaszuk, Piotr
    Lukowsk, Aneta
    Straszynski, Pawel
    Dzierek, Kazimierz
    [J]. ADVANCES IN COMPUTER VISION, VOL 2, 2020, 944 : 734 - 745
  • [5] Meshes vs. Depth Maps in Face Recognition Systems
    Pabiasz, Sebastian
    Starczewski, Janusz T.
    [J]. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND SOFT COMPUTING, PT I, 2012, 7267 : 567 - 573
  • [6] Face recognition: Sparse Representation vs. Deep Learning
    Alskeini, Neamah H.
    Kien Nguyen Thanh
    Chandran, Vinod
    Boles, Wageeh
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2ND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON GRAPHICS AND SIGNAL PROCESSING (ICGSP 2018), 2018, : 31 - 37
  • [7] Development of holistic vs. featural processing in face recognition
    Nakabayashi, Kazuyo
    Liu, Chang Hong
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN HUMAN NEUROSCIENCE, 2014, 8
  • [8] Eigenface vs. Spectroface: A comparison on the face recognition problems
    El-Arief, Taha I.
    Nagaty, Khaled A.
    El-Sayed, Ahmed S.
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FOURTH IASTED INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SIGNAL PROCESSING, PATTERN RECOGNITION, AND APPLICATIONS, 2007, : 321 - +
  • [9] Smart vs. intelligent vs. active IP networks
    Pujolle, G
    [J]. INTELLIGENCE IN NETWORKS, 2000, 30 : 27 - 34
  • [10] Survey incentives: Cash vs. in-kind; face-to-face vs. mail; Response rate vs. nonresponse error
    Ryu, E
    Couper, MP
    Marans, RW
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH, 2006, 18 (01) : 89 - 106