TY - GEN
T1 - To Frontalize or Not to Frontalize
T2 - 18th IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, WACV 2018
AU - Banerjee, Sandipan
AU - Brogan, Joel
AU - Križaj, Janez
AU - Bharati, Aparna
AU - Webster, Brandon Richard
AU - Štruc, Vitomir
AU - Flynn, Patrick J.
AU - Scheirer, Walter J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 IEEE.
PY - 2018/5/3
Y1 - 2018/5/3
N2 - Face recognition performance has improved remarkably in the last decade. Much of this success can be attributed to the development of deep learning techniques such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs). While CNNs have pushed the state-of-the-art forward, their training process requires a large amount of clean and correctly labelled training data. If a CNN is intended to tolerate facial pose, then we face an important question: should this training data be diverse in its pose distribution, or should face images be normalized to a single pose in a pre-processing step? To address this question, we evaluate a number of facial landmarking algorithms and a popular frontalization method to understand their effect on facial recognition performance. Additionally, we introduce a new, automatic, single-image frontalization scheme that exceeds the performance of the reference frontalization algorithm for video-to-video face matching on the Point and Shoot Challenge (PaSC) dataset. Additionally, we investigate failure modes of each frontalization method on different facial yaw using the CMU Multi-PIE dataset. We assert that the subsequent recognition and verification performance serves to quantify the effectiveness of each pose correction scheme.
AB - Face recognition performance has improved remarkably in the last decade. Much of this success can be attributed to the development of deep learning techniques such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs). While CNNs have pushed the state-of-the-art forward, their training process requires a large amount of clean and correctly labelled training data. If a CNN is intended to tolerate facial pose, then we face an important question: should this training data be diverse in its pose distribution, or should face images be normalized to a single pose in a pre-processing step? To address this question, we evaluate a number of facial landmarking algorithms and a popular frontalization method to understand their effect on facial recognition performance. Additionally, we introduce a new, automatic, single-image frontalization scheme that exceeds the performance of the reference frontalization algorithm for video-to-video face matching on the Point and Shoot Challenge (PaSC) dataset. Additionally, we investigate failure modes of each frontalization method on different facial yaw using the CMU Multi-PIE dataset. We assert that the subsequent recognition and verification performance serves to quantify the effectiveness of each pose correction scheme.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050972845&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/WACV.2018.00009
DO - 10.1109/WACV.2018.00009
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85050972845
T3 - Proceedings - 2018 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, WACV 2018
SP - 20
EP - 29
BT - Proceedings - 2018 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, WACV 2018
PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
Y2 - 12 March 2018 through 15 March 2018
ER -