4.7 Article

Two-Stream 3-D convNet Fusion for Action Recognition in Videos With Arbitrary Size and Length

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MULTIMEDIA
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 634-644

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TMM.2017.2749159

关键词

Action recognition; 3D convolution neural networks

资金

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [ZYGX2014J063, ZYGX2014Z007]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61502080, 61632007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

3-D convolutional neural networks (3-D-convNets) have been very recently proposed for action recognition in videos, and promising results are achieved. However, existing 3-D-convNets has two artificial requirements that may reduce the quality of video analysis: 1) It requires a fixed-sized (e.g., 112 x 112) input video; and 2) most of the 3-D-convNets require a fixed-length input (i.e., video shots with fixed number of frames). To tackle these issues, we propose an end-to-end pipeline named Two-stream 3-D-convNet Fusion, which can recognize human actions in videos of arbitrary size and length using multiple features. Specifically, we decompose a video into spatial and temporal shots. By taking a sequence of shots as input, each stream is implemented using a spatial temporal pyramid pooling (STPP) convNet with a long short-term memory (LSTM) or CNN-E model, softmax scores of which are combined by a late fusion. We devise the STPP convNet to extract equal-dimensional descriptions for each variable-size shot, and we adopt the LSTM/CNN-E model to learn a global description for the input video using these time-varying descriptions. With these advantages, our method should improve all 3-D CNN-based video analysis methods. We empirically evaluate our method for action recognition in videos and the experimental results show that our method outperforms the state-of-the-art methods (both 2-D and 3-D based) on three standard benchmark datasets (UCF101, HMDB51 and ACT datasets).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据