RECOGNIZING HUMAN-OBJECT INTERACTION IN STILL IMAGE BY MODELING THE MUTUAL CONTEXT OF OBJECTS AND...

RECOGNIZING HUMAN-OBJECT INTERACTION IN STILL IMAGE BY MODELING THE MUTUAL CONTEXT OF OBJECTS AND HUMAN POSES

Date: 2013/05/27

Instructor: Prof. Wang, Sheng-Jyh

Student: Hung, Fei-Fan

Yao, B., and Fei-fei, L. IEEE Transactions on PAMI(2012)

2

Outline• Introduction

• Intuition and goal

• Model Representation• Model Learning

• Obtaining Atomic Poses• Training Detectors and Classifiers• Estimating Model Parameters

• Model Inference• Experimental Results• Conclusion

3






4

Why using context in computer vision?

• simple image vs. human activities

~3-4%

with context

without context

With mutual context:

Without context:

5

Challenges in Human Pose Estimation

• Human pose estimation is challenging

• Object detection facilitate human pose estimation

Difficult part appearance

Self-occlusion

Image region looks like a body part

6

Challenges in Object Detection• Object detection is challenging

• human pose estimation facilitate object detection

Small, low-resolution, partially occluded

Image region similar to detection target

7

The Goal• To build a mutual context model in Human-Object

Interaction(HOI) activities

8






9

Tennis ball

Croquet mallet

Volleyball

Tennis racket

O:

Model representation• Modeling the mutual context of object and human poses

A:

Croquet shot

Volleyball smash

Tennis forehand

H:

P: body parts,

, M:num of bounding box

More than one atomic pose H in A

Body parts

10

• : co-occurrence compatibility

between A,O,H• : spatial relationship between O,H• : modeling the image evidence with detectors

or classifiers

Model representation

H

A

P1 P2 PL

O1 O2

activity

Human poseobjects

11𝝓1: Co-occurrence context

• co-occurrence between all A,O,H

• : strength of co-occurrence interaction

between

: indicator function: total number of atomic poses : total number of objects : total number of activity classes

H

A

P1 P2 PL

O1 O2

12

• Spatial relationship between all O and different H

• : weight of • : a sparse binary vector • shows relative location• of w.r.t.

𝝓2: Spatial context

H

A

P1 P2 PL

O1 O2

:

13

• Model O in the image I using object detection score

• For all object O• : vector of score of detecting • : weight of

• Between Om and Om’

• : binary feature vector• : weight of and

𝝓3: Modeling objects

H

A

P1 P2 PL

O1 O2

14𝝓4: Modeling human pose

• Model atomic pose that H belongs to and likelihood

• : Gaussian likelihood function• : vector of score of detecting

body part in

H

A

P1 P2 PL

O1 O2

15𝝓5: Modeling activity

• Model HOI activity by training activity classifier

• : -dim output of one-versus-all (OVA)

discriminative classifier

taking image as features

• : feature weight of

H

A

P1 P2 PL

O1 O2

17

Model Properties• Spatial context between O and H

• Object detection and human pose estimation facilitate each other • Ignore the objects and body parts that are unreliable

• Flexible to extend to large scale datasets and other activities• Jointly model can share all objects and atomic poses

18






19

Model Learning

Assign human pose to atomic pose

Training detectors and classifiers

Estimate parameters by Maximum Likelihood

20

• Using clustering to obtain atomic poses

• Normalize the annotations

• Finding missing part• Using the nearest visible neighbor

• Obtain a set of atomic poses• Hierarchical clustering

with maximum linkage

measure :

Obtaining Atomic Poses




21

Training Detectors and Classifiers• : Object detector in • : Human body part detector in

• : Overall activity classifier in




deformable part model

Spatial pyramid matching (SPM)SIFT + 3 level image pyramid

24

Estimating Model Parameters

• Estimate by using ML approach with zero-mean Gaussian prior




25

Learning result

26






27

Model Inference

Initialize with learned results

New image

Update human body parts

Update object detection results

Update A and H labels

28

Initialization

Initialize Activity classification

Object detectionHuman pose estimation

New image

Initialize with learned results

A: SPM classificationO: object detectionH: pictorial structure model

29

Update model inference• Marginal distribution of human pose:

• Using mixture of Gaussian to refine the prior of body part




30

Update model inference

• Greedy forward search method :• Initial and no object in bounding box• Select • Label box as • update

• Stop when <0




O,H

O,A,H O,I

31

Update model inference• Enumerate possible A and H label

• Optimize




32






33

Experimental Results (Sports Dataset)

34

Experimental Results (Sports Dataset)

35

Experimental Results (Sports Dataset)• Activity classification

37

Experimental results (PPMI Dataset)

38

Experimental results (PPMI Dataset)

40






41

Conclusion• Mutual context can significantly improve the performance

in difficult visual recognition problems

• The joint model can share all the information

• Annotate all the human body parts and objects in training images

42

Reference• Yao, B., and Fei-fei, L. “Recognizing Human-Object Interactions in

Still Images by Modeling the Mutual Context of Objects and Human Poses,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (2012)

• B. Yao and L. Fei-Fei, “Modeling Mutual Context of Object and Human Pose in Human-Object Interaction Activities,” Proc. IEEE Conf. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2010

• B. Sapp, A. Toshev, and B. Taskar, “Cascade Models for Articulated Pose Estimation,” Proc. European Conf. Computer Vision, 2010.

• S. Lazebnik, C. Schmid, and J. Ponce, “Beyond Bags of Features: Spatial Pyramid Matching for Recognizing Natural Scene Categories,” Proc. IEEE CS Conf. Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2006.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hierarchical_clustering

RECOGNIZING HUMAN-OBJECT INTERACTION IN STILL IMAGE BY MODELING THE MUTUAL CONTEXT OF OBJECTS AND...

Documents

Transcript of RECOGNIZING HUMAN-OBJECT INTERACTION IN STILL IMAGE BY MODELING THE MUTUAL CONTEXT OF OBJECTS AND...