Active Appearance Models.ppt

Active Appearance Models Edwards, Taylor, and Cootes Presented by Bryan Russell Overview Overview of Appearance Models Combined Appearance Models Active Appearance Model Search Results Constrained Active Appearance Models What are we trying to do? Formulate model to “interpret” face images Set of parameters to characterize identity, pose, expression, lighting, etc. Want compact set of parameters Want efficient and robust model Appearance Models Eigenfaces (Turk and Pentland, 1991) Not robust to shape changes Not robust to changes in pose and expression Ezzat and Poggio approach (1996) Synthesize new views of face from set of example views Does not generalize to unseen faces First approach: Active Shape Model (ASM) Point Distribution Model First Approach: ASM (cont.) Training: Apply PCA to labeled images New image Project mean shape Iteratively modify model points to fit local neighborhood Lessons learned ASM is relatively fast ASM too simplistic; not robust when new images are introduced May not converge to good solution Key insight: ASM does not incorporate all gray-level information in parameters Combined Appearance Models Combine shape and gray-level variation in single statistical appearance model Goals: Model has better representational power Model inherits appearance models benefits Model has comparable performance How to generate a CAM Label training set with landmark points representing positions of key features Represent these landmarks as a vector x Perform PCA on these landmark vectors How to generate a CAM (cont.) We get: Warp each image so that each control point matches mean shape Sample gray-level information g Apply PCA to gray-level data How to generate a CAM (cont.) We get: Concatenate shape and gray-level parameters (from PCA) Apply a further PCA to the concatenated vectors How to generate a CAM (cont.) We get: CAM Properties Combines shape and gray-level variations in one model No need for separate models Compared to separate models,