This disclosure relates generally to image analysis and more particularly to object detection in spatio-temporal signals.
Surveillance systems typically employ video cameras or other sensors to collect spatio-temporal data. In the simplest systems, that data is displayed for contemporaneous screening by security personnel and/or recorded for later reference after a security breach. In those systems, the task of detecting objects of interest is performed by a human observer. A significant advance occurs when the system itself is able to perform object detection itself, either partially or completely.
In a typical outdoor surveillance system, for example, one may be interested in detecting objects such as humans, vehicles, animals, etc., that move through the environment. Different objects might pose different threats or levels of alarm. For example, an animal in the scene might be perfectly normal, but a human or a vehicle in the scene might be cause for an alarm and might require the immediate attention of a security guard. In addition to legitimate activity in the scene (humans, vehicles, animals, etc.), the environment might be susceptible to significant lighting changes, background motion such as moving foliage and camera jitter due to a strong wind. An effective object-of-interest detection algorithm should be able to discern objects of interest in a highly dynamic environment in a timely fashion. A powerful surveillance system ideally has the capability to detect objects of interest while scoring high on the following benchmarks: (1) accuracy; (2) computational efficiency; and (3) flexibility. An accurate system detects objects of interest with high probability while achieving a very low false alarm rate. The computational workload should be manageable enough to provide its detection results and raise alarms while not missing any relevant activity in the environment and guiding a human operator's attention to the activity as it is happening. A flexible system can handle multiple input modalities and multiple operating conditions seamlessly.
There are presently a variety of algorithms and strategies for automatic object detection in a spatio-temporal signal. Most of those detection methods cater to a subset of the operating conditions underlying the intended applications of the algorithm. It is known, for example, to employ a classification mechanism that maps a given spatial region of a spatio-temporal signal to one of a finite set of object types. Algorithms differ in how they process or search the spatio-temporal signal prior to the classification stage. Some algorithms employ a focus-of-attention mechanism to limit the extent of the search to less than the signal's full spatial extent.
A focus-of-attention mechanism that identifies possible regions that could contain an object of interest is often referred to as foreground/background separation. Foreground/background separation in prior art fundamentally relies on some notion of an outlier. This notion is typically quantified in terms of some probability threshold. Almost all the existing algorithms either rely on outlier metrics completely (memory-based algorithms) or rely on conceptual classification mechanisms completely (memory-less algorithms). The latter tend to be computationally overwhelming and not suitable for real time algorithms. The former tend to be fast, but not as robust. Using sophisticated models for outlier detection such as multi-modal distributions, accounts for the dynamic and periodic nature of the background component, but it does not explicitly account for the statistics of the foreground component. Furthermore, outlier-based techniques are not sensitive to subtle differences in the chromatic signatures of objects of interest and that of the environment. Overall, then, existing techniques suffer from one or both of (1) a lack of performance, i.e., high false positives and negatives; and (2) a high computational cost.
The present invention is directed at methods and systems for detecting objects of interest in a spatio-temporal signal.
According to one embodiment, a system processes a digital spatio-temporal input signal containing zero or more foreground objects of interest superimposed on a background. The system comprises a foreground/background separation module, a foreground object grouping module, an object classification module, and a feedback connection. The foreground/background separation module receives the spatio-temporal input signal as an input and, according to one or more adaptable parameters, produces as outputs foreground/background labels designating elements of the spatio-temporal input signal as either foreground or background. The foreground object grouping module is connected to the foreground/background separation module and identifies groups of selected foreground-labeled elements as foreground objects. The object classification module is connected to the foreground object grouping module and generates object-level information related to the foreground object. The object-level information adapts the one or more adaptable parameters of the foreground/background separation module, via the feedback connection.
According to another embodiment, a method processes a spatio-temporal signal containing zero or more foreground objects of interest superimposed on a background. The method receives the spatio-temporal signal, which comprises a number of elements, and separates, according to one or more adaptable separation parameters, the elements of the spatio-temporal signal into a foreground category or a background category. The method groups selected foreground-labeled elements in the spatio-temporal signal together as foreground object(s), thereby resulting in zero or more foreground objects, and generates object-level information related to the foreground object(s). The method also adapts the one or more adaptable separation parameters of the foreground/background separation mechanism on the basis of the object-level information.
As used herein, the term “spatio-temporal signal” means a time-varying or potentially time-varying signal across one or more spatial dimensions, hyperspatial dimensions, or other bases that can be analogized to spatial or hyperspatial dimensions; in general, a spatio-temporal signal is of the form s(n,t) where n≧1. Also as used herein, the term “connected” means logically or physically connected directly or indirectly through one or more intermediaries.
Details concerning the construction and operation of particular embodiments are set forth in the following sections with reference to the below-listed drawings.
With reference to the above-listed drawings, this section describes particular embodiments and their detailed construction and operation. As one skilled in the art will appreciate in view of this disclosure, certain embodiments may be capable of achieving certain advantages over the known prior art, including some or all of the following: (1) taking advantage of the tremendous amount of object level information available via the classification mechanism as a guiding hand to the online learning algorithm directing the modification of parameters at the foreground/background separation level; (2) increasing sensitivity to subtle differences in the chromatic signature of objects by adapting the parameters discriminatively; (3) increasing performance; (4) reducing computational complexity; (5) increasing flexibility; (6) detecting objects in highly dynamic environments; (7) identifying types of moving objects; (8) better parsing of an environment into regions with salient physical properties; (9) handling gradual camera motion; (10) scaling to multiple zoom resolutions; and (11) adapting in real-time to changing illumination and/or environmental conditions and foreground/background appearance (e.g., a change in pose). These and other advantages of various embodiments will be apparent upon reading the following.
Returning to the prototypical example of a two dimensional video signal, today's most prevalent sensors generate color video signals encoded in a red-green-blue (RGB) color space representation. Preferably, a CHI color converter 120 converts the signal from its native form (e.g., RGB) to a CHI color representation. Such a conversion can be accomplished according to the teachings set forth in commonly-owned U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 10/811,376, filed by the present inventors on Mar. 25, 2004, and 60/457,748, filed by the present inventors on Mar. 25, 2003, both of which are incorporated herein by reference. Preferably, the CHI-encoded spatio-temporal signal is compressed by a quantizer 130, which may be, for example, a vector quantizer. Although the CHI color converter 120 and the quantizer 130 are optional, they are advantageous in that they better represent the sensor data and reduce the data bandwidth, respectively.
In any event, a spatio-temporal signal sq(xq,yq,n), which is a value-, space-, and time-quantized version of s(x,y,t), is processed further by the remaining subsystems or modules of the system 100: a foreground/background separator 140, a spatial grouper 150, a temporal tracker 155, and an object classifier 160. Together those subsystems work in an interrelated manner to detect objects of interest (OOI) in the spatio-temporal signal sq(xq,yq,n). Broadly speaking, the foreground/background separator 140 labels each element of the signal as either a foreground element or a background element. The spatial grouper 150 groups spatially contiguous foreground elements together and identifies them as foreground objects. The temporal tracker 155, an optional module, tracks the movement of foreground objects over time. The object classifier 160 classifies the foreground objects according to a taxonomy of possible object types, some of which are types of interest. Those foreground objects classified as a type that is of interest are flagged as objects of interest. Finally, object-level information generated by the object classifier 160 is fed back to the foreground/background separator 140 in order to adapt the parameters of the foreground/background separator 140 and thereby improve its performance. Additional details regarding the foreground/background separator 140, the spatial grouper 150, the temporal tracker 155, and the object classifier 160 are presented next.
The environment and the objects to be detected in the spatio-temporal signal sq(xq,yq,n) manifest themselves as spatially and temporally ordered sets of signal values. Each such ordered set of signal values is considered to be a set of “signal generators”; such a set constitutes a small subset of the total number of values that sq(xq,yq,n) can assume. At the nth time interval, sq(xq,yq,n) at spatial coordinates <xq,yq> takes its value from either a foreground or background object, both of which have an associated set of signal generators. The background and the foreground objects may or may not share the same set of generators. The generators themselves are abstract constructs intended to encapsulate characteristic sets of signal values (or “signatures”) associated with specific spatial background regions and foreground objects in sq(xq,yq,n). The set of generators has N members Two discriminant functions—one for foreground objects γFg and one for background regions γBg—partition the space of all generators into a set that most likely corresponds to foreground and a set that most likely corresponds to background. The background and foreground discriminant functions can take additional contextual information, such as location, into account. Background generator sets are generally associated with specific regions (i.e., <xq,yq> coordinates clustered together in a locale), whereas foreground generator sets are generally associated with the entire spatial domain of sq(xq,yq,n). Put another way, background generator sets are spatially localized because background doesn't move, whereas foreground generator sets are spatially global because foreground objects do move. The background and foreground discriminant functions can be derived from a Markovian model using a causal Bayesian inference formulation described below.
A Markovian model of the spatio-temporal signal sq(xq,yq,n) can be formulated, which generates a particular temporal sequence of colors associated with an object possessing a set of generators. Environmental conditions such as illumination changes and artifacts introduced by the sensor can distort the color produced by the generators. Sensor-specific quantization based on a physical model of the sensor can account for certain distortions and greatly simplify the foreground/background separation process. Although the foreground/background separation algorithm does not assume a perfect distortionless signal, a good physical model, such as the CHI color space representation noted earlier, is beneficial. This document will refer to the smallest spatial quanta of a spatio-temporal signal as a pixel, without narrowing its scope to just three-component color or grayscale imagery. Furthermore, without any loss of generality, assume that a vector quantization process in line with the aforementioned sensor model maps a multi-dimensional signal value for a pixel to a scalar integer. The vector quantization need not necessarily be a lossy quantization scheme, although a properly designed lossy quantization mechanism can dramatically reduce storage requirements and computational complexity of subsequent processing. Each generator is indexed by its corresponding vector quantization integer. Similarly, a Markov generator chain is represented by a temporally ordered set of integers. The causal Bayesian inference formulation is based on the Markov generator model. Both are described below.
The following notation will be used in the derivation of the discriminant functions:
One preferred form of the foreground/background separator 140 computes for each element of the spatio-temporal signal sq(xq,yq,n) two discriminant functions γBg and γFg. The former is a measure related to the likelihood that the element is part of the background, and the latter is a measure related to the likelihood that the element is part of a foreground object. The Markovian-Bayesian formulation for the discriminant functions γBg and γFg is given by the joint probability of the ith generator at time increment n, the jth generator at the previous time increment, and the background or the foreground. This, by way of Bayes' Rule, is equal to the three-term product of (i) the conditional probability of the ith generator at time increment n, given the jth generator at the previous time increment and the foreground or background-and-region, (ii) the conditional probability of the jth generator at the previous time increment, given the foreground or the background-and-region, and (iii) the prior probability of background or foreground. As mentioned previously, background generators are region-dependent, whereas foreground generators are spatially global. Consequently, the only region-dependent aspect of the foreground discriminant function expression is the prior probability of a foreground object, given the region The discriminant function expressions follow:
Note that the binary indicator vector for the ith generator is
the Markov model's generator transition matrix is
and the generators' prior probabilities are expressed by the “beta vector”
The preceding equations employ a Bayesian probabilistic framework to characterize the Markovian manner in which the “signatures” of the foreground objects and background in the spatio-temporal signal change over time.
Using the causal inference model, one can derive the following maximum a posteriori (MAP) decision rule for foreground/background separation:
where the probability terms are defined as follows:
For each of the probability measures listed above, the difference between those for the background and those for the foreground is only that each of the background measures is defined for a specific local region, whereas the foreground measures are, but for the exception of the foreground prior for a specific region, defined over the entire spatial domain. This reflects the fact that background is geographically fixed, whereas foreground objects are able to move over the entire spatial domain. Thus, their parameterization is identical except for the extent of spatial validity of the measures. Note also that in the formulation of Equation (7) enforces the domain constraint that the foreground generator distributions are not region dependent—again, but for the localization of a foreground object captured in the prior probability
Not all applications require the explicit modeling of the Markov generator chain. For those applications where modeling the spatial ordering of generators is sufficient to partition the space into foreground and background, one can use the following alternative MAP decision rule:
The simpler formulation in equation (8) does not capture the temporal ordering of a sequence of generators that is built into equation (7). Environments with periodic variations in lighting and other uninteresting periodic phenomena will benefit from the full power of equation (7). For many outdoor applications, equation (8) is sufficient. Although the non-Markovian formulation does not capture temporal order, it efficiently models a multiplicity of generators within any given region. The non-Markovian formulation can be considered as the full Markovian formulation wherein all temporal transitions from one generator to another are assumed equally probable. In other words, a non-Markovian model for computing the discriminant functions γBg and γFg results when the generator transition matrix is the identity matrix (An,R=I) in Equation (2). The expression in equation (8) then simplifies to
γBg{right arrow over (u)}iTBn(1−κn)
γFg{right arrow over (u)}iTBnκn (9)
The discriminant functions for foreground/background separation γBg and γFg have explicit probabilistic interpretations whether the Markovian or the non-Markovian formulation is used. Although the discriminant functions begin as strict probability measures, the feedback from higher-level processes force the measures to evolve to a more compact and efficient discriminator. The evolved measure no longer necessarily reflects a probability in its strict sense but tends to be just as effective, if not more.
Other definitions of the discriminant functions γBg and γFg are possible. In general, some or all of the parameters of the discriminant functions γBg and γFg are determined or adapted according to an adaptation or learning algorithm, as explained in greater detail below. In the case of the Markovian formulation expressed in Equations (2), the parameters are A, B, and κ; in the non-Markovian formulation expressed in Equation (9), the parameters are B and κ.
After calculating the discriminant functions γBg and γFg for a given element in the spatio-temporal signal sq(xq,yq,n), the foreground/background separator 140 compares them and makes a determination whether the element is foreground or background, according to the following decision rule:
On the basis of that decision rule, the foreground/background separator 140 generates a label w (either foreground or background) for the element. That is repeated for each element in the spatio-temporal signal sq(xq,yq,n). The foreground/background labels ω are preferably organized in the form of a segmentation map, which has the same range as the spatio-temporal input signal sq(xq,yq,n) but has a binary domain Ω, as implied by Equation (7). In other words, the segmentation map ω(xq,yq,n) is a spatio-temporal signal, just like sq(xq,yq,n). It labels each element of sq(xq, yq, n) as either foreground or background.
A regional element , or the unit region, may be as small as an individual pixel or as large as the entire image at a given time. A preferred element size is a three-by-three square block of pixels. Other element sizes, including non-square sizes, are possible.
The symbol ω is used as shorthand for the foreground/background, spatio-temporal labeling ω(xq,yq,n). The labels ω determined by the foreground/background separator 140 are input to the spatial grouper 150. Using connected components (e.g., regional elements) analysis, the spatial grouper 150 identifies contiguous foreground-labeled elements and associates them together as a single foreground object.
The objects can then be passed to the object classifier 160. Generally, the object classifier 160 classifies each foreground object as one of a number of types. Examples of possible types include human, car, truck, and dog. Another possible type is an “unknown,” to which all objects not belonging to another type are classified. Some object types may be “of interest”; others may not. In one preferred form of the system 100, a temporal tracker 155 is situated between the spatial grouper 150 and the object classifier 160. The temporal tracker 155 implements a tracking mechanism and a classification history for each object in order to track objects over time; it aggregates the classification history to provide a more confident classification. Although the temporal tracker 155 is optional, it is advantageous, as objects of interest tend to persist in a scene for some span of time. The tracking mechanism delineates each object in a scene by its tightest fitting rectangle and fits a motion model to each object. The motion model may be linear, and may be adaptively modified by an algorithm, such as the recursive least squares (RLS) algorithm.
The tracking mechanism can be based on the same generator model used for foreground/background separation. It begins by forming a set of all objects in the environment (including interesting and uninteresting objects) and decomposing the global distribution of foreground object-conditional generator probabilities into a sum, across all foreground objects, of joint generator-foreground-object probabilities:
The variable λk in the above equation indicates the number of foreground pixels that corresponds to the kth object. Ideally, the probability distributions for each object are orthonormal with respect to each other, i.e., each object has a distinct generator signature. Often this is not true, but the most discriminative of generators are the most interesting. Thus, the relative entropy between two distributions could be used as a criterion to match them. Because the logarithmic terms involved in the computation of the relative entropy tend to be unnecessarily computationally intensive and unstable, the L1 distance between two distributions is preferably used as the distance measure, as follows:
This distance measure is used by the temporal tracker 155, which distinguishes among objects by tracking the migration of their associated discriminative generators over space and time.
Combining the position and color information results in the following tracking algorithm:
The constant η in the above update equation regulates the dependence of the generator signature on the previous appearance of the object. If η=0, then the object's signature only depends on the its appearance at the previous time instance. If η=1, then the object's signature depends on its entire history uniformly. Preferably, 0.75≦η≦0.999, most preferably η≈0.95.
Meanwhile, as objects are being tracked temporally, they are also being classified at each time increment by which the object classifier 160 operates. The result is a classification history for each object, as the classification for a given object may change over time. An output classification for an object is preferably determined on the basis of its classification history. For example, the classification most often given to an object throughout its history so far may be taken as the output classification. Finally, each object is denominated as either interesting or uninteresting based on its output classification.
The object-level information is then used to adjust the parameters of the foreground/background separator 140. According to one embodiment, this is done using a classifier-generated “true” or reference foreground/background label ωREF for each element, determined according to the following three rules: (1) If an object is classified as an object of interest, set the reference label to foreground for every element that is a part of the object; (2) if an object is classified as not an object of interest, set the reference label to background for every element that is a part of the object; and (3) for all elements that are not a part of an object at all, set the reference label to background. The foreground/background separator 140 can then implement a adaptation or learning mechanism to adjust its parameter values so that its foreground/background labels better match the reference labels. This top-down adaptation is advantageous in that high-level classification context is used to improve the low-level segmentation of the image's foreground and background components. One technique for doing that adaptation or learning involves the maximization of a figure of merit function, which can be any function that measures how well the foreground/background separator 140 has predicted the reference foreground/background labels. A preferred figure of merit function is a risk/benefit/classification figure of merit (RBCFM) function σ(δ,ψ), which is defined and discussed in detail in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2003/0088532 A1, the entirety of which is incorporated herein by reference (see, in particular,
Regardless how the figure of merit function is formulated, the adaptation or learning criteria is to maximize that function over all of the foreground/background separator 140 parameters or some subset of them. While various optimization strategies can be utilized to perform that maximization, a preferred strategy is gradient ascent. In the case of the RBCFM function σ(δ,ψ), gradient ascent is accomplished by iteration of the following equation:
{right arrow over (θ)}(n+1)={right arrow over (θ)}(n)+μ·∇Θσ(δ,ψ) (16)
where {right arrow over (θ)} is a vector of the adaptable parameters, μ is the step size, and ∇Θ is the gradient operator applied to the RBCFM function σ(δ,ψ) over the domain of {right arrow over (θ)}. In the special case where δ=L·(γFg−γBg), as in Equation (15); {right arrow over (θ)}(n)=Bn; γFg and γBg are computed according to the non-Markovian model, as in Equation (9); and κ is not adaptable, then the gradient ascent iteration equation is as follows for each component βi of the vector B:
An analogous expression for the more complicated Markovian model of equations (2) is derived similarly, using {right arrow over (θ)}(n)={An,Bn}.
Because, the parameters β are constrained to be positive and to sum to one (see Equation (4)), the gradient ascent algorithm preferably incorporates those constraints during each iteration as follows: (1) compute an updated value of βi according to Equation (18) above for all i; (2) if βi<0, set βi=0; and (3) normalize the set of updated values as follows:
Alternatively, the constraint conditions expressed in steps (2) and (3) above can be enforced less frequently than every iteration, e.g., every third or every tenth iteration.
The inventors have discovered that this constrained gradient ascent algorithm is quite stable for a rather broad range of step size μ. Preferably, μ≈0.3 results in an acceptable convergence rate with stability. The step size μ itself may be adaptable or time-varying.
In cases of spatio-temporal signals obtained from sensors with variable spatial acuity (e.g., optical sensors with pan, tilt, and zoom capabilities), it is possible to take into account changes in sensor acuity. First, as to zoom, one defines, as a design choice, a unit region R on the spatial domain of the signal sq(xq,yq,n). Preferably, R is a three-by-three block. Based on that unit region, a scale pyramid can be defined as follows:
Equation (19) stipulates that at all scales above the first, the block s at the specified scale comprises a three-by-three set of blocks from the next lower scale s-1. Equation (19) further establishes the spatially ordered block subscripting convention used below in equation (20). A region at decimation level s occupies an area with dimensions 3s×3s, measured on the scale of the signal sq(xq,yq,n). Recursively, the distribution is specified as follows:
At the maximum decimation level smax, the region occupies the entire image and , . Thus, at the highest decimation level, both the foreground and the background discriminant functions share global relevance. In order to maximize detection performance it is typically advisable to operate at some intermediate decimation level. The inventors have empirically found s=2 to be a reliable number. It is also possible to craft an algorithm to automatically choose the decimation level.
Sensor motion can affect the causal model of the spatio-temporal signal. Specifically, the region dependence of the conditional likelihood term in Equation (7) can no longer be easily estimated. Sensor motion can take two forms: (1) predictable and periodic; or (2) unpredictable. The causal inference model in equation (7) is valid for predictable and/or periodic sensor motion. With an appropriate choice of a spatial decimation level, s, the generator model is fully capable of capturing a time varying background model. Predictable and periodic sensor motion is also one of those scenarios wherein explicit modeling of the Markov generator chain offers significant discriminative advantages. Unpredictable sensor motion presents a challenge that can still be handled by the causal inference model, but requires some additional algorithmic machinery. Moreover, unpredictable sensor motion also places some constraints on the detection capabilities of the algorithm. Specifically, the sensor should remain stationary while the system learns its initial foreground and background discriminant functions. Further constraints depend on whether or not the sensor motion is measurable. Measurable sensor motion involves an external process that deterministically computes the motion and transforms it to pixel coordinates. In other words, the pan and tilt of the sensor can be transformed to Δx and Δy translations of the signal and zoom can be translated to a scaling of the signal. Immeasurable sensor motion can only be estimated indirectly via the observed change in the spatio-temporal signal. If sensor motion can be measured, then the region dependence of the background discriminant can be computed deterministically from the previously inferred model, and the causal inference paradigm continues to be the same after the regions are appropriately remapped. In other words, given a remapping function γ(), the following decision rule applies:
If the computational budget for estimating sensor motion exists and a calibration process can be executed before the system is operational, then the remapping function γ() can be estimated. Often, an online estimation of the remapping function is not computationally feasible and a calibration process is not practical. In that case, removing the regional dependence of the background discriminant function results in the decision rule taking the following form:
Assuming that the system is notified when the sensor is in motion and when it is stationary, an algorithm for dealing with the case in which the sensor is in motion and there is no way to measure or estimate the motion is as follows:
The methods and systems illustrated and described herein can exist in a variety of forms both active and inactive. For example, they can exist as one or more software programs comprised of program instructions in source code, object code, executable code or other formats. Any of the above can be embodied on a computer readable medium, which include storage devices and signals, in compressed or uncompressed form. Exemplary computer readable storage devices include conventional computer system RAM (random access memory), ROM (read only memory), EPROM (erasable, programmable ROM), EEPROM (electrically erasable, programmable ROM), flash memory and magnetic or optical disks or tapes. Exemplary computer readable signals, whether modulated using a carrier or not, are signals that a computer system hosting or running a computer program can be configured to access, including signals downloaded through the Internet or other networks. Concrete examples of the foregoing include distribution of software on a CD ROM or via Internet download. In a sense, the Internet itself, as an abstract entity, is a computer readable medium. The same is true of computer networks in general.
The terms and descriptions used herein are set forth by way of illustration only and are not meant as limitations. Those skilled in the art will recognize that many variations can be made to the details of the above-described embodiments without departing from the underlying principles of the invention. The scope of the invention should therefore be determined only by the following claims, and their equivalents, in which all terms are to be understood in their broadest reasonable sense unless otherwise indicated.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/884,486, filed Jul. 1, 2004, titled “Methods and Systems for Detecting Objects of Interest in Spatio-temporal Signals,” which claims the benefit under 35 U.S.C. §119(e) to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/485,085, filed Jul. 3, 2003. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/884,486 and U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/485,085 are both incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4639784 | Fling | Jan 1987 | A |
4779095 | Guerreri | Oct 1988 | A |
4931868 | Kadar | Jun 1990 | A |
5091780 | Pomerleau | Feb 1992 | A |
5099322 | Gove | Mar 1992 | A |
5212547 | Otsuki | May 1993 | A |
5253070 | Hong | Oct 1993 | A |
5268967 | Jang et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5825936 | Clarke et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
6577762 | Seeger et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
7227988 | Curry et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7627171 | Hampshire et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
20030088532 | Hampshire, II | May 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100046799 A1 | Feb 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60485085 | Jul 2003 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10884486 | Jul 2004 | US |
Child | 12611850 | US |