MediaEval 2012 Visual Privacy Task: Privacy and Intelligibility through Pixellation and Edge...
-
Upload
mediaeval2012 -
Category
Technology
-
view
429 -
download
0
description
Transcript of MediaEval 2012 Visual Privacy Task: Privacy and Intelligibility through Pixellation and Edge...
Privacy and Intelligibility through Pixellation and Edge Detection Prof. Atta Badii, Mathieu Einig
School of Systems Engineering University of Reading, UKWWW: http://www.isr.reading.ac.ukeMAIL: [email protected]
2
Introduction
• Privacy protection by visual anonymisation
• Two main challenges:
- Detecting faces
- Filtering faces
3
Face Detection
• LBP Face Detector from OpenCV
- Extremely fast
- Good results for close-up frontal faces
• Histogram of Oriented Gradients
- Trained for detecting upper bodies
4
Face Detection
5
Face Detection
• Algorithms comparison:
LBP Cascade
Histogram of Oriented Gradient
Speed + -Long distance - +
Medium distance + +Short distance + =
Light Invariance - +Occlusion Invariance
- +
Front/back discrimination
+ -
6
Face Detection
• Combination
- Good in most situations
- Cannot differentiate between front and back in some cases
• Tracking
- Hungarian algorithm• Matching made on position and size of the face
- Faces kept even when lost• Face position extrapolated for a few frames
• Duration depends on the number of previous detections
7
Face Detection
• Front/back discrimination:
- If LBP detector triggered, it is a frontal face
- If not• Assume that people looking at the camera are moving
towards it
• Use tracker to analyse the position and size of the faces
- HMM trained for 3 scenarios:
» Moving towards the camera
» Standing still
» Moving away from the camera
- Anonymisation is required only for the 2 first cases
8
Face Filtering
• Privacy through pixellation
- Faces reduced to 12x12 pixels
- Additional scrambling with median blur
9
Face Filtering
• Intelligibility through edge detection
- Sobel filter on the saturation component of the image
- Saturation component is the most ‘robust’ in different lighting conditions
10
Face Filtering
• Merging of the two filters
11
Results: Objective Evaluation
• Accuracy
- Overlap between the detected faces and the manual annotation
• Anonymity
- Ratio of faces that could no longer be detected after filtering
• Intelligibility
- Number of people detected even after filtering
• Similarity
- SSIM and PSNR scores
12
Results: Objective Evaluation
• Results
Criteria Score
Accuracy 0.50 ± 0.19
Anonymity 1.00 ± 0.00
Intelligibility 0.93 ± 0.06
SSIM 0.96 ± 0.02
PSNR 35.80 ± 1.07
13
Results: Subjective Evaluation
• Questionnaire
- Subjects’ accessories
- Subjects’ gender
- Subjects’ ethnicity
- Rating the perceived effectiveness of privacy protection
- Rating the level of perceived irritation/distraction from the filter
- Recognising filtered faces from a list of clear faces
14
Results: Subjective Evaluation
• Results:
15
Conclusion
• Privacy protected to some extent
- One misdetection gives away too much information on the person
- Better face detection is crucial
• Irritation/distraction need to be addressed
16
Thank you
Atta BadiiIntelligent Systems Research Lab (ISR)
School of Systems EngineeringUniversity of Reading
Whiteknights RG6 6AY UKPhone: 00 44 118 378 7842
Fax: 00 44 118 975 [email protected], www.ISR.reading.ac.uk