Patent Grant
10026285
The invention relates to a system for automatic video surveillance employing video primitives.
For the convenience of the reader, the references referred to herein are listed below. In the specification, the numerals within brackets refer to respective references.
The listed references are incorporated herein by reference.
The following references describe moving target detection:
The following references describe detecting and tracking humans:
The following references describe blob analysis:
The following references describe blob analysis for trucks, cars, and people:
The following reference describes analyzing a single-person blob and its contours:
The following reference describes internal motion of blobs, including any motion-based segmentation:
Video surveillance of public spaces has become extremely widespread and accepted by the general public. Unfortunately, conventional video surveillance systems produce such prodigious volumes of data that an intractable problem results in the analysis of video surveillance data.
A need exists to reduce the amount of video surveillance data so analysis of the video surveillance data can be conducted.
A need exists to filter video surveillance data to identify desired portions of the video surveillance data.
An object of the invention is to reduce the amount of video surveillance data so analysis of the video surveillance data can be conducted.
An object of the invention is to filter video surveillance data to identify desired portions of the video surveillance data.
An object of the invention is to produce a real time alarm based on an automatic detection of an event from video surveillance data.
An object of the invention is to integrate data from surveillance sensors other than video for improved searching capabilities.
An object of the invention is to integrate data from surveillance sensors other than video for improved event detection capabilities
The invention includes an article of manufacture, a method, a system, and an apparatus for video surveillance.
The article of manufacture of the invention includes a computer-readable medium comprising software for a video surveillance system, comprising code segments for operating the video surveillance system based on video primitives.
The article of manufacture of the invention includes a computer-readable medium comprising software for a video surveillance system, comprising code segments for accessing archived video primitives, and code segments for extracting event occurrences from accessed archived video primitives.
The system of the invention includes a computer system including a computer-readable medium having software to operate a computer in accordance with the invention.
The apparatus of the invention includes a computer including a computer-readable medium having software to operate the computer in accordance with the invention.
The article of manufacture of the invention includes a computer-readable medium having software to operate a computer in accordance with the invention.
Moreover, the above objects and advantages of the invention are illustrative, and not exhaustive, of those that can be achieved by the invention. Thus, these and other objects and advantages of the invention will be apparent from the description herein, both as embodied herein and as modified in view of any variations which will be apparent to those skilled in the art.
A “video” refers to motion pictures represented in analog and/or digital form. Examples of video include: television, movies, image sequences from a video camera or other observer, and computer-generated image sequences.
A “frame” refers to a particular image or other discrete unit within a video.
An “object” refers to an item of interest in a video. Examples of an object include: a person, a vehicle, an animal, and a physical subject.
An “activity” refers to one or more actions and/or one or more composites of actions of one or more objects. Examples of an activity include: entering; exiting; stopping; moving; raising; lowering; growing; and shrinking.
A “location” refers to a space where an activity may occur. A location can be, for example, scene-based or image-based. Examples of a scene-based location include: a public space; a store; a retail space; an office; a warehouse; a hotel room; a hotel lobby; a lobby of a building; a casino; a bus station; a train station; an airport; a port; a bus; a train; an airplane; and a ship. Examples of an image-based location include: a video image; a line in a video image; an area in a video image; a rectangular section of a video image; and a polygonal section of a video image.
An “event” refers to one or more objects engaged in an activity. The event may be referenced with respect to a location and/or a time.
A “computer” refers to any apparatus that is capable of accepting a structured input, processing the structured input according to prescribed rules, and producing results of the processing as output. Examples of a computer include: a computer; a general purpose computer; a supercomputer; a mainframe; a super mini-computer; a mini-computer; a workstation; a micro-computer; a server, an interactive television; a hybrid combination of a computer and an interactive television; and application-specific hardware to emulate a computer and/or software. A computer can have a single processor or multiple processors, which can operate in parallel and/or not in parallel. A computer also refers to two or more computers connected together via a network for transmitting or receiving information between the computers. An example of such a computer includes a distributed computer system for processing information via computers linked by a network.
A “computer-readable medium” refers to any storage device used for storing data accessible by a computer. Examples of a computer-readable medium include: a magnetic hard disk; a floppy disk; an optical disk, such as a CD-ROM and a DVD; a magnetic tape; a memory chip; and a carrier wave used to carry computer-readable electronic data, such as those used in transmitting and receiving e-mail or in accessing a network.
“Software” refers to prescribed rules to operate a computer. Examples of software include: software; code segments; instructions; computer programs; and programmed logic.
A “computer system” refers to a system having a computer, where the computer comprises a computer-readable medium embodying software to operate the computer.
A “network” refers to a number of computers and associated devices that are connected by communication facilities. A network involves permanent connections such as cables or temporary connections such as those made through telephone or other communication links. Examples of a network include: an internet, such as the Internet; an intranet; a local area network (LAN); a wide area network (WAN); and a combination of networks, such as an internet and an intranet.
Embodiments of the invention are explained in greater detail by way of the drawings, where the same reference numerals refer to the same features.
The automatic video surveillance system of the invention is for monitoring a location for, for example, market research or security purposes. The system can be a dedicated video surveillance installation with purpose-built surveillance components, or the system can be a retrofit to existing video surveillance equipment that piggybacks off the surveillance video feeds. The system is capable of analyzing video data from live sources or from recorded media. The system is capable of processing the video data in real-time, and storing the extracted video primitives to allow very high speed forensic event detection later. The system can have a prescribed response to the analysis, such as record data, activate an alarm mechanism, or activate another sensor system. The system is also capable of integrating with other surveillance system components. The system may be used to produce, for example, security or market research reports that can be tailored according to the needs of an operator and, as an option, can be presented through an interactive web-based interface, or other reporting mechanism.
An operator is provided with maximum flexibility in configuring the system by using event discriminators. Event discriminators are identified with one or more objects (whose descriptions are based on video primitives), along with one or more optional spatial attributes, and/or one or more optional temporal attributes. For example, an operator can define an event discriminator (called a “loitering” event in this example) as a “person” object in the “automatic teller machine” space for “longer than 15 minutes” and “between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.” Event discriminators can be combined with modified Boolean operators to form more complex queries.
Although the video surveillance system of the invention draws on well-known computer vision techniques from the public domain, the inventive video surveillance system has several unique and novel features that are not currently available. For example, current video surveillance systems use large volumes of video imagery as the primary commodity of information interchange. The system of the invention uses video primitives as the primary commodity with representative video imagery being used as collateral evidence. The system of the invention can also be calibrated (manually, semi-automatically, or automatically) and thereafter automatically can infer video primitives from video imagery. The system can further analyze previously processed video without needing to reprocess completely the video. By analyzing previously processed video, the system can perform inference analysis based on previously recorded video primitives, which greatly improves the analysis speed of the computer system.
The use of video primitives may also significantly reduce the storage requirements for the video. This is because the event detection and response subsystem uses the video only to illustrate the detections. Consequently, video may be stored at a lower quality. In a potential embodiment, the video may be stored only when activity is detected, not all the time. In another potential embodiment, the quality of the stored video may be dependent on whether activity is detected: video can be stored at higher quality (higher frame-rate and/or bit-rate) when activity is detected and at lower quality at other times. In another exemplary embodiment, the video storage and database may be handled separately, e.g., by a digital video recorder (DVR), and the video processing subsystem may just control whether data is stored and with what quality.
As another example, the system of the invention provides unique system tasking. Using equipment control directives, current video systems allow a user to position video sensors and, in some sophisticated conventional systems, to mask out regions of interest or disinterest. Equipment control directives are instructions to control the position, orientation, and focus of video cameras. Instead of equipment control directives, the system of the invention uses event discriminators based on video primitives as the primary tasking mechanism. With event discriminators and video primitives, an operator is provided with a much more intuitive approach over conventional systems for extracting useful information from the system. Rather than tasking a system with an equipment control directives, such as “camera A pan 45 degrees to the left,” the system of the invention can be tasked in a human-intuitive manner with one or more event discriminators based on video primitives, such as “a person enters restricted area A.”
Using the invention for market research, the following are examples of the type of video surveillance that can be performed with the invention: counting people in a store; counting people in a part of a store; counting people who stop in a particular place in a store; measuring how long people spend in a store; measuring how long people spend in a part of a store; and measuring the length of a line in a store.
Using the invention for security, the following are examples of the type of video surveillance that can be performed with the invention: determining when anyone enters a restricted area and storing associated imagery; determining when a person enters an area at unusual times; determining when changes to shelf space and storage space occur that might be unauthorized; determining when passengers aboard an aircraft approach the cockpit; determining when people tailgate through a secure portal; determining if there is an unattended bag in an airport; and determining if there is a theft of an asset.
An exemplary application area may be access control, which may include, for example: detecting if a person climbs over a fence, or enters a prohibited area; detecting if someone moves in the wrong direction (e.g., at an airport, entering a secure area through the exit); determining if a number of objects detected in an area of interest does not match an expected number based on RFID tags or card-swipes for entry, indicating the presence of unauthorized personnel. This may also be useful in a residential application, where the video surveillance system may be able to differentiate between the motion of a person and pet, thus eliminating most false alarms. Note that in many residential applications, privacy may be of concern; for example, a homeowner may not wish to have another person remotely monitoring the home and to be able to see what is in the house and what is happening in the house. Therefore, in some embodiments used in such applications, the video processing may be performed locally, and optional video or snapshots may be sent to one or more remote monitoring stations only when necessary (for example, but not limited to, detection of criminal activity or other dangerous situations).
Another exemplary application area may be asset monitoring. This may mean detecting if an object is taken away from the scene, for example, if an artifact is removed from a museum. In a retail environment asset monitoring can have several aspects to it and may include, for example: detecting if a single person takes a suspiciously large number of a given item; determining if a person exits through the entrance, particularly if doing this while pushing a shopping cart; determining if a person applies a non-matching price tag to an item, for example, filling a bag with the most expensive type of coffee but using a price tag for a less expensive type; or detecting if a person leaves a loading dock with large boxes.
Another exemplary application area may be for safety purposes. This may include, for example: detecting if a person slips and falls, e.g., in a store or in a parking lot; detecting if a car is driving too fast in a parking lot; detecting if a person is too close to the edge of the platform at a train or subway station while there is no train at the station; detecting if a person is on the rails; detecting if a person is caught in the door of a train when it starts moving; or counting the number of people entering and leaving a facility, thus keeping a precise headcount, which can be very important in case of an emergency.
Another exemplary application area may be traffic monitoring. This may include detecting if a vehicle stopped, especially in places like a bridge or a tunnel, or detecting if a vehicle parks in a no parking area.
Another exemplary application area may be terrorism prevention. This may include, in addition to some of the previously-mentioned applications, detecting if an object is left behind in an airport concourse, if an object is thrown over a fence, or if an object is left at a rail track; detecting a person loitering or a vehicle circling around critical infrastructure; or detecting a fast-moving boat approaching a ship in a port or in open waters.
Another exemplary application area may be in care for the sick and elderly, even in the home. This may include, for example, detecting if the person falls; or detecting unusual behavior, like the person not entering the kitchen for an extended period of time.
The video sensors 14 provide source video to the computer system 11. Each video sensor 14 can be coupled to the computer system 11 using, for example, a direct connection (e.g., a firewire digital camera interface) or a network. The video sensors 14 can exist prior to installation of the invention or can be installed as part of the invention. Examples of a video sensor 14 include: a video camera; a digital video camera; a color camera; a monochrome camera; a camera; a camcorder, a PC camera; a webcam; an infra-red video camera; and a CCTV camera.
The video recorders 15 receive video surveillance data from the computer system 11 for recording and/or provide source video to the computer system 11. Each video recorder 15 can be coupled to the computer system 11 using, for example, a direct connection or a network. The video recorders 15 can exist prior to installation of the invention or can be installed as part of the invention. The video surveillance system in the computer system 11 may control when and with what quality setting a video recorder 15 records video. Examples of a video recorder 15 include: a video tape recorder; a digital video recorder; a video disk; a DVD; and a computer-readable medium.
The I/O devices 16 provide input to and receive output from the computer system 11. The I/O devices 16 can be used to task the computer system 11 and produce reports from the computer system 11. Examples of I/O devices 16 include: a keyboard; a mouse; a stylus; a monitor; a printer; another computer system; a network; and an alarm.
The other sensors 17 provide additional input to the computer system 11. Each other sensor 17 can be coupled to the computer system 11 using, for example, a direct connection or a network. The other sensors 17 can exit prior to installation of the invention or can be installed as part of the invention. Examples of another sensor 17 include, but are not limited to: a motion sensor; an optical tripwire; a biometric sensor; an RFID sensor, and a card-based or keypad-based authorization system. The outputs of the other sensors 17 can be recorded by the computer system 11, recording devices, and/or recording systems.
In block 21, the video surveillance system is set up as discussed for
In block 22, the video surveillance system is calibrated. Once the video surveillance system is in place from block 21, calibration occurs. The result of block 22 is the ability of the video surveillance system to determine an approximate absolute size and speed of a particular object (e.g., a person) at various places in the video image provided by the video sensor. The system can be calibrated using manual calibration, semi-automatic calibration, and automatic calibration. Calibration is further described after the discussion of block 24.
In block 23 of
Real-time extraction of the video primitives from the video stream is desirable to enable the system to be capable of generating real-time alerts, and to do so, since the video provides a continuous input stream, the system cannot fall behind.
The video primitives should also contain all relevant information from the video, since at the time of extracting the video primitives, the user-defined rules are not known to the system. Therefore, the video primitives should contain information to be able to detect any event specified by the user, without the need for going back to the video and reanalyzing it.
A concise representation is also desirable for multiple reasons. One goal of the proposed invention may be to extend the storage recycle time of a surveillance system. This may be achieved by replacing storing good quality video all the time by storing activity description meta-data and video with quality dependent on the presence of activity, as discussed above. Hence, the more concise the video primitives are, the more data can be stored. In addition, the more concise the video primitive representation, the faster the data access becomes, and this, in turn may speed up forensic searching.
The exact contents of the video primitives may depend on the application and potential events of interest. Some exemplary embodiments are described below
An exemplary embodiment of the video primitives may include scene/video descriptors, describing the overall scene and video. In general, this may include a detailed description of the appearance of the scene, e.g., the location of sky, foliage, man-made objects, water, etc; and/or meteorological conditions, e.g., the presence/absence of precipitation, fog, etc. For a video surveillance application, for example, a change in the overall view may be important. Exemplary descriptors may describe sudden lighting changes; they may indicate camera motion, especially the facts that the camera started or stopped moving, and in the latter case, whether it returned to its previous view or at least to a previously known view; they may indicate changes in the quality of the video feed, e.g., if it suddenly became noisier or went dark, potentially indicating tampering with the feed; or they may show a changing waterline along a body of water (for further information on specific approaches to this latter problem, one may consult, for example, co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/954,479, filed on Oct. 1, 2004, and incorporated herein by reference).
Another exemplary embodiment of the video primitives may include object descriptors referring to an observable attribute of an object viewed in a video feed. What information is stored about an object may depend on the application area and the available processing capabilities. Exemplary object descriptors may include generic properties including, but not limited to, size, shape, perimeter, position, trajectory, speed and direction of motion, motion salience and its features, color, rigidity, texture, and/or classification. The object descriptor may also contain some more application and type specific information: for humans, this may include the presence and ratio of skin tone, gender and race information, some human body model describing the human shape and pose; or for vehicles, it may include type (e.g., truck, SUV, sedan, bike, etc.), make, model, license plate number. The object descriptor may also contain activities, including, but not limited to, carrying an object, running, walking, standing up, or raising arms. Some activities, such as talking, fighting or colliding, may also refer to other objects. The object descriptor may also contain identification information, including, but not limited to, face or gait.
Another exemplary embodiment of the video primitives may include flow descriptors describing the direction of motion of every area of the video. Such descriptors may, for example, be used to detect passback events, by detecting any motion in a prohibited direction (for further information on specific approaches to this latter problem, one may consult, for example, co-pending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/766,949, filed on Jan. 30, 2004, and incorporated herein by reference).
Primitives may also come from non-video sources, such as audio sensors, heat sensors, pressure sensors, card readers, RFID tags, biometric sensors, etc.
A classification refers to an identification of an object as belonging to a particular category or class. Examples of a classification include: a person; a dog; a vehicle; a police car, an individual person; and a specific type of object.
A size refers to a dimensional attribute of an object. Examples of a size include: large; medium; small; flat; taller than 6 feet; shorter than 1 foot; wider than 3 feet; thinner than 4 feet; about human size; bigger than a human; smaller than a human; about the size of a car; a rectangle in an image with approximate dimensions in pixels; and a number of image pixels.
Position refers to a spatial attribute of an object. The position may be, for example, an image position in pixel coordinates, an absolute real-world position in some world coordinate system, or a position relative to a landmark or another object.
A color refers to a chromatic attribute of an object. Examples of a color include: white; black; grey; red; a range of HSV values; a range of YUV values; a range of RGB values; an average RGB value; an average YUV value; and a histogram of RGB values.
Rigidity refers to a shape consistency attribute of an object. The shape of non-rigid objects (e.g., people or animals) may change from frame to frame, while that of rigid objects (e.g., vehicles or houses) may remain largely unchanged from frame to frame (except, perhaps, for slight changes due to turning).
A texture refers to a pattern attribute of an object. Examples of texture features include: self-similarity; spectral power, linearity; and coarseness.
An internal motion refers to a measure of the rigidity of an object. An example of a fairly rigid object is a car, which does not exhibit a great amount of internal motion. An example of a fairly non-rigid object is a person having swinging arms and legs, which exhibits a great amount of internal motion.
A motion refers to any motion that can be automatically detected. Examples of a motion include: appearance of an object; disappearance of an object; a vertical movement of an object; a horizontal movement of an object; and a periodic movement of an object.
A salient motion refers to any motion that can be automatically detected and can be tracked for some period of time. Such a moving object exhibits apparently purposeful motion. Examples of a salient motion include: moving from one place to another; and moving to interact with another object.
A feature of a salient motion refers to a property of a salient motion. Examples of a feature of a salient motion include: a trajectory; a length of a trajectory in image space; an approximate length of a trajectory in a three-dimensional representation of the environment; a position of an object in image space as a function of time; an approximate position of an object in a three-dimensional representation of the environment as a function of time; a duration of a trajectory; a velocity (e.g., speed and direction) in image space; an approximate velocity (e.g., speed and direction) in a three-dimensional representation of the environment; a duration of time at a velocity; a change of velocity in image space; an approximate change of velocity in a three-dimensional representation of the environment; a duration of a change of velocity; cessation of motion; and a duration of cessation of motion. A velocity refers to the speed and direction of an object at a particular time. A trajectory refers a set of (position, velocity) pairs for an object for as long as the object can be tracked or for a time period.
A scene change refers to any region of a scene that can be detected as changing over a period of time. Examples of a scene change include: an stationary object leaving a scene; an object entering a scene and becoming stationary; an object changing position in a scene; and an object changing appearance (e.g. color, shape, or size).
A feature of a scene change refers to a property of a scene change. Examples of a feature of a scene change include: a size of a scene change in image space; an approximate size of a scene change in a three-dimensional representation of the environment; a time at which a scene change occurred; a location of a scene change in image space; and an approximate location of a scene change in a three-dimensional representation of the environment.
A pre-defined model refers to an a priori known model of an object. Examples of a pre-defined model may include: an adult; a child; a vehicle; and a semi-trailer.
Referring now to
The primitive data can be thought of as data stored in a database. To detect event occurrences in it, an efficient query language is required. Embodiments of the inventive system may include an activity inferencing language, which will be described below.
Traditional relational database querying schemas often follow a Boolean binary tree structure to allow users to create flexible queries on stored data of various types. Leaf nodes are usually of the form “property relationship value,” where a property is some key feature of the data (such as time or name); a relationship is usually a numerical operator (“>”, “<”, “=”, etc); and a value is a valid state for that property. Branch nodes usually represent unary or binary Boolean logic operators like “and”, “or”, and “not”.
This may form the basis of an activity query formulation schema, as in embodiments of the present invention. In case of a video surveillance application, the properties may be features of the object detected in the video stream, such as size, speed, color, classification (human, vehicle), or the properties may be scene change properties.
Embodiments of the invention may extend this type of database query schema in two exemplary ways: (1) the basic leaf nodes may be augmented with activity detectors describing spatial activities within a scene; and (2) the Boolean operator branch nodes may be augmented with modifiers specifying spatial, temporal and object interrelationships.
Activity detectors correspond to a behavior related to an area of the video scene. They describe how an object might interact with a location in the scene.
Combining queries with modified Boolean operators (combinators) may add further flexibility. Exemplary modifiers include spatial, temporal, object, and counter modifiers.
A spatial modifier may cause the Boolean operator to operate only on child activities (i.e., the arguments of the Boolean operator, as shown below a Boolean operator, e.g., in
A temporal modifier may cause the Boolean operator to operate only on child activities that occur within a specified period of time of each other, outside of such a time period, or within a range of times. The time ordering of events may also be specified. For example “and—first within 10 seconds of second” may be used to mean that the “and” only applies if the second child activity occurs not more than 10 seconds after the first child activity.
An object modifier may cause the Boolean operator to operate only on child activities that occur involving the same or different objects. For example “and—involving the same object” may be used to mean that the “and” only applies if the two child activities involve the same specific object.
A counter modifier may cause the Boolean operator to be triggered only if the condition(s) is/are met a prescribed number of times. A counter modifier may generally include a numerical relationship, such as “at least n times,” “exactly n times,” “at most n times,” etc. For example, “or—at least twice” may be used to mean that at least two of the sub-queries of the “or” operator have to be true. Another use of the counter modifier may be to implement a rule like “alert if the same person takes at least five items from a shelf.”
This example also indicates the power of the combinators. Theoretically it is possible to define a separate activity detector for left turn, without relying on simple activity detectors and combinators. However, that detector would be inflexible, making it difficult to accommodate arbitrary turning angles and directions, and it would also be cumbersome to write a separate detector for all potential events. In contrast, using the combinators and simple detectors provides great flexibility.
Other examples of complex activities that can be detected as a combination of simpler ones may include a car parking and a person getting out of the car or multiple people forming a group, tailgating. These combinators can also combine primitives of different types and sources. Examples may include rules such as “show a person inside a room before the lights are turned off;” “show a person entering a door without a preceding card-swipe;” or “show if an area of interest has more objects than expected by an RFID tag reader,” i.e., an illegal object without an RFID tag is in the area.
A combinator may combine any number of sub-queries, and it may even combine other combinators, to arbitrary depths. An example, illustrated in
As an example to illustrate a use of combinators, consider the detection of inserted/left behind objects. Examples of inserted/left behind objects may include, e.g., an unattended bag, a parked car, graffiti, etc. U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 10/354,096, 11/139,600, and 11/288,200, which are incorporated by reference herein, discuss various methods that may be applied to the detection of a stationary object in video. In certain applications simply detecting the stationary object is sufficient, e.g., in some areas, the existence of any parked vehicle or any unattended package may provide sufficient reason to generate an alert. In some applications, however, such an indiscriminate approach would generate a large number of false alerts. Hence, additional tests and filters may be needed to eliminate such false alerts. A basic stationary object detection algorithm may provide an alert any time a bag is put down and not moved for some period of time. However, for example, in a public waiting area, like a train platform or an airport terminal, putting a bag down and not touching it is normal behavior. The real event of interest in such a scenario may be detection of unattended luggage.
An exemplary embodiment of detecting unattended luggage is to define an exclusion zone around the stationary object and alerting only if no object of interest (e.g., a person) is inside the exclusion zone. The exclusion zone may mean that there should be nothing in the zone. The exclusion zone may also be interpreted so as to not contain any object of a certain type. For example, one way to establish an exclusion zone may be that there should be no people in the exclusion zone, but there may be other objects, like another bag or a cart. The exclusion zone may also have a time associated with it so that an alert is generated only if the exclusion zone has no object of interest for a prescribed time—this way a person stepping away from the bag just briefly may still be allowed. Conversely, if an object of interest is in the exclusion zone for only a brief period of time, e.g., a person walks by the unattended bag, an alert may still be generated.
The size of the exclusion zone may be determined in multiple ways. In one exemplary embodiment, if camera calibration information is available, the exclusion zone may be defined as a shape with fixed real-world size around the object, e.g., a one-meter radius circle. As another exemplary embodiment, not requiring calibration, as illustrated in
In another exemplary embodiment, the size of the exclusion zone may be learned. The learning may be supervised or unsupervised. In an exemplary embodiment, the system may observe and analyze a given video scene for an extended period of time, and may detect all stationary objects and the distances of other objects to the stationary object to learn the typical normal distance between a stationary object and a person putting the object down. Similarly, the duration of time that a person may spend outside of the exclusion zone may also be learned.
Embodiments of the invention may perform video surveillance in two steps: in the first step the video is analyzed and primitives are generated; in the second step, activity inferencing is performed on the primitives. This allows the user to experiment with the exclusion zone and duration on a prerecorded primitive database to minimize false alerts, while still providing timely alerts.
Stationary object detection with an exclusion zone may be implemented using a modified “and” operator 241, combining a stationary target detection activity detector 242 and an area of interest inside activity detector 243 with spatial 244 and temporal 245 modifiers, as illustrated in
The stationary object detection algorithm may also detect the person responsible for leaving the object behind. In such a case, the system may continue to track the person after the stationary object detection. Hence, the system may detect the unattended package when the person is outside of the exclusion zone for a sufficient amount of time, independent of whether there are other people around the package. This approach may even detect a suspicious exchange of a bag or other similar object, e.g., when a first person stops, puts a bag down, a second person stops next to the bag, and the first person walks away, leaving the bag with the second person.
Another example when the results of stationary object detection may have to be filtered is when a car cannot be left unattended in a certain area. The system may detect an unattended vehicle if a vehicle stops, a person gets out of the vehicle from the driver's seat and that person leaves the area of the vehicle for longer than a predefined time period. In contrast, if nobody gets of the car, or if nobody gets out from the driver's seat, there may be no alert generated, or an alert may be generated only after a longer period of time.
Another example when the results of stationary object detection may have to be filtered is when the stationary event has to be detected in response to an external event. For example, the user may want to detect stationary bags on a subway platform only when the train leaves. This may be accomplished using a modified “and” operator combining the train departure event and the stationary object event with a temporal modifier. The train departure event may be detected using an external event, e.g., the subway system sending a “door closing” or a “train departing” signal to the surveillance system, or it may be detected using the video surveillance system and detecting when the train starts moving again or when people stop entering or exiting the train. The external event may be integrated into the system in different ways. In one exemplary embodiment, the external events may be represented using non-video primitives. This information may be stored in the primitive storage 1605, thus making it available for later off-line processing. In another exemplary embodiment, the external event may be a filter on the alert generations, i.e., it may enable or disable the event response 167. In another exemplary embodiment, the external event may generate event occurrences, and the event response 167 may combine the occurrences and determine whether to generate an alert.
A modified “and” operator stores alerts from its sub-queries and combines the results according to the various modifiers. How and which sub-queries are stored may also affect the detection results. Additional modifiers may determine how the sub-queries are stored and used in event detection. One modifier may allow a sub-query result to be part of multiple events or to be part of only one event. Another modifier may limit sub-query storage to only one sub-query event altogether, or to just one sub-query event per target. These modifiers may also determine whether that single sub-query event is the first or the last overall or per target.
Certain applications may require all sub-query results of the detection by the modified “and” operator to be unique, i.e., each sub-event may contribute to only a single event. For example, the goal may be to detect people going straight instead of turning. As illustrated in
An application may be to verify that within some predetermined time period of a person exiting an area through a door, the door locks automatically. This may be detected using a modified “and” combinator of an area of interest exit activity detector and a door not locking detector with a temporal modifier. Since several people may leave the area close to each other, it is not guaranteed that the door locks after every single person exiting. This means that a modifier may be used to store only the last area of interest exit activity detector result.
All these detectors may optionally be combined with temporal attributes. Examples of a temporal attribute include: every 15 minutes; between 9:00 pm and 6:30 am; less than 5 minutes; longer than 30 seconds; and over the weekend.
In block 24 of
In block 41, the computer system 11 obtains source video from the video sensors 14 and/or the video recorders 15.
In block 42, video primitives are extracted in real time from the source video. As an option, non-video primitives can be obtained and/or extracted from one or more other sensors 17 and used with the invention. The extraction of video primitives is illustrated with
In block 52, objects are detected via change. Any change detection algorithm for detecting changes from a background model can be used for this block. An object is detected in this block if one or more pixels in a frame are deemed to be in the foreground of the frame because the pixels do not conform to a background model of the frame. As an example, a stochastic background modeling technique, such as dynamically adaptive background subtraction, can be used, which is described in {1} and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/694,712 filed Oct. 24, 2000. The detected objects are forwarded to block 53.
The motion detection technique of block 51 and the change detection technique of block 52 are complimentary techniques, where each technique advantageously addresses deficiencies in the other technique. As an option, additional and/or alternative detection schemes can be used for the techniques discussed for blocks 51 and 52. Examples of an additional and/or alternative detection scheme include the following: the Pfinder detection scheme for finding people as described in {8}; a skin tone detection scheme; a face detection scheme; and a model-based detection scheme. The results of such additional and/or alternative detection schemes are provided to block 53.
As an option, if the video sensor 14 has motion (e.g., a video camera that sweeps, zooms, and/or translates), an additional block can be inserted before blocks between blocks 51 and 52 to provide input to blocks 51 and 52 for video stabilization. Video stabilization can be achieved by affine or projective global motion compensation. For example, image alignment described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/609,919, filed Jul. 3, 2000, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,738,424, which is incorporated herein by reference, can be used to obtain video stabilization.
In block 53, blobs are generated. In general, a blob is any object in a frame. Examples of a blob include: a moving object, such as a person or a vehicle; and a consumer product, such as a piece of furniture, a clothing item, or a retail shelf item. Blobs are generated using the detected objects from blocks 32 and 33. Any technique for generating blobs can be used for this block. An exemplary technique for generating blobs from motion detection and change detection uses a connected components scheme. For example, the morphology and connected components algorithm can be used, which is described in {1}.
In block 54, blobs are tracked. Any technique for tracking blobs can be used for this block. For example, Kalman filtering or the CONDENSATION algorithm can be used. As another example, a template matching technique, such as described in {1}, can be used. As a further example, a multi-hypothesis Kalman tracker can be used, which is described in {5}. As yet another example, the frame-to-frame tracking technique described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/694,712 filed Oct. 24, 2000, can be used. For the example of a location being a grocery store, examples of objects that can be tracked include moving people, inventory items, and inventory moving appliances, such as shopping carts or trolleys.
As an option, blocks 51-54 can be replaced with any detection and tracking scheme, as is known to those of ordinary skill. An example of such a detection and tracking scheme is described in {11}.
In block 55, each trajectory of the tracked objects is analyzed to determine if the trajectory is salient. If the trajectory is insalient, the trajectory represents an object exhibiting unstable motion or represents an object of unstable size or color, and the corresponding object is rejected and is no longer analyzed by the system. If the trajectory is salient, the trajectory represents an object that is potentially of interest. A trajectory is determined to be salient or insalient by applying a salience measure to the trajectory. Techniques for determining a trajectory to be salient or insalient are described in {13} and {18}.
In block 56, each object is classified. The general type of each object is determined as the classification of the object. Classification can be performed by a number of techniques, and examples of such techniques include using a neural network classifier {14} and using a linear discriminatant classifier {14}. Examples of classification are the same as those discussed for block 23.
In block 57, video primitives are identified using the information from blocks 51-56 and additional processing as necessary. Examples of video primitives identified are the same as those discussed for block 23. As an example, for size, the system can use information obtained from calibration in block 22 as a video primitive. From calibration, the system has sufficient information to determine the approximate size of an object. As another example, the system can use velocity as measured from block 54 as a video primitive.
In block 43, the video primitives from block 42 are archived. The video primitives can be archived in the computer-readable medium 13 or another computer-readable medium. Along with the video primitives, associated frames or video imagery from the source video can be archived. This archiving step is optional; if the system is to be used only for real-time event detection, the archiving step can be skipped.
In block 44, event occurrences are extracted from the video primitives using event discriminators. The video primitives are determined in block 42, and the event discriminators are determined from tasking the system in block 23. The event discriminators are used to filter the video primitives to determine if any event occurrences occurred. For example, an event discriminator can be looking for a “wrong way” event as defined by a person traveling the “wrong way” into an area between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The event discriminator checks all video primitives being generated according to
In block 45, action is taken for each event occurrence extracted in block 44, as appropriate.
In block 61, responses are undertaken as dictated by the event discriminators that detected the event occurrences. The responses, if any, are identified for each event discriminator in block 34.
In block 62, an activity record is generated for each event occurrence that occurred. The activity record includes, for example: details of a trajectory of an object; a time of detection of an object; a position of detection of an object, and a description or definition of the event discriminator that was employed. The activity record can include information, such as video primitives, needed by the event discriminator. The activity record can also include representative video or still imagery of the object(s) and/or area(s) involved in the event occurrence. The activity record is stored on a computer-readable medium.
In block 63, output is generated. The output is based on the event occurrences extracted in block 44 and a direct feed of the source video from block 41. The output is stored on a computer-readable medium, displayed on the computer system 11 or another computer system, or forwarded to another computer system. As the system operates, information regarding event occurrences is collected, and the information can be viewed by the operator at any time, including real time. Examples of formats for receiving the information include: a display on a monitor of a computer system; a hard copy; a computer-readable medium; and an interactive web page.
The output can include a display from the direct feed of the source video from block 41. For example, the source video can be displayed on a window of the monitor of a computer system or on a closed-circuit monitor. Further, the output can include source video marked up with graphics to highlight the objects and/or areas involved in the event occurrence. If the system is operating in forensic analysis mode, the video may come from the video recorder.
The output can include one or more reports for an operator based on the requirements of the operator and/or the event occurrences. Examples of a report include: the number of event occurrences which occurred; the positions in the scene in which the event occurrence occurred; the times at which the event occurrences occurred; representative imagery of each event occurrence; representative video of each event occurrence; raw statistical data; statistics of event occurrences (e.g., how many, how often, where, and when); and/or human-readable graphical displays.
In
In
For either
The video image of
Referring back to block 22 in
For manual calibration, the operator provides to the computer system 11 the orientation and internal parameters for each of the video sensors 14 and the placement of each video sensor 14 with respect to the location. The computer system 11 can optionally maintain a map of the location, and the placement of the video sensors 14 can be indicated on the map. The map can be a two-dimensional or a three-dimensional representation of the environment. In addition, the manual calibration provides the system with sufficient information to determine the approximate size and relative position of an object.
Alternatively, for manual calibration, the operator can mark up a video image from the sensor with a graphic representing the appearance of a known-sized object, such as a person. If the operator can mark up an image in at least two different locations, the system can infer approximate camera calibration information.
For semi-automatic and automatic calibration, no knowledge of the camera parameters or scene geometry is required. From semi-automatic and automatic calibration, a lookup table is generated to approximate the size of an object at various areas in the scene, or the internal and external camera calibration parameters of the camera are inferred.
For semi-automatic calibration, the video surveillance system is calibrated using a video source combined with input from the operator. A single person is placed in the field of view of the video sensor to be semi-automatic calibrated. The computer system 11 receives source video regarding the single person and automatically infers the size of person based on this data. As the number of locations in the field of view of the video sensor that the person is viewed is increased, and as the period of time that the person is viewed in the field of view of the video sensor is increased, the accuracy of the semi-automatic calibration is increased.
Blocks 72-25 are the same as blocks 51-54, respectively.
In block 76, the typical object is monitored throughout the scene. It is assumed that the only (or at least the most) stable object being tracked is the calibration object in the scene (i.e., the typical object moving through the scene). The size of the stable object is collected for every point in the scene at which it is observed, and this information is used to generate calibration information.
In block 77, the size of the typical object is identified for different areas throughout the scene. The size of the typical object is used to determine the approximate sizes of similar objects at various areas in the scene. With this information, a lookup table is generated matching typical apparent sizes of the typical object in various areas in the image, or internal and external camera calibration parameters are inferred. As a sample output, a display of stick-sized figures in various areas of the image indicate what the system determined as an appropriate height. Such a stick-sized figure is illustrated in
For automatic calibration, a learning phase is conducted where the computer system 11 determines information regarding the location in the field of view of each video sensor. During automatic calibration, the computer system 11 receives source video of the location for a representative period of time (e.g., minutes, hours or days) that is sufficient to obtain a statistically significant sampling of objects typical to the scene and thus infer typical apparent sizes and locations.
In block 87, trackable regions in the field of view of the video sensor are identified. A trackable region refers to a region in the field of view of a video sensor where an object can be easily and/or accurately tracked. An untrackable region refers to a region in the field of view of a video sensor where an object is not easily and/or accurately tracked and/or is difficult to track. An untrackable region can be referred to as being an unstable or insalient region. An object may be difficult to track because the object is too small (e.g., smaller than a predetermined threshold), appear for too short of time (e.g., less than a predetermined threshold), or exhibit motion that is not salient (e.g., not purposeful). A trackable region can be identified using, for example, the techniques described in {13}.
In block 88, the sizes of the objects are identified for different areas throughout the scene. The sizes of the objects are used to determine the approximate sizes of similar objects at various areas in the scene. A technique, such as using a histogram or a statistical median, is used to determine the typical apparent height and width of objects as a function of location in the scene. In one part of the image of the scene, typical objects can have a typical apparent height and width. With this information, a lookup table is generated matching typical apparent sizes of objects in various areas in the image, or the internal and external camera calibration parameters can be inferred.
For plot A, the x-axis depicts the height of the blob in pixels, and the y-axis depicts the number of instances of a particular height, as identified on the x-axis, that occur. The peak of the line for plot A corresponds to the most common height of blobs in the designated region in the scene and, for this example, the peak corresponds to the average height of a person standing in the designated region.
Assuming people travel in loosely knit groups, a similar graph to plot A is generated for width as plot B. For plot B, the x-axis depicts the width of the blobs in pixels, and the y-axis depicts the number of instances of a particular width, as identified on the x-axis, that occur. The peaks of the line for plot B correspond to the average width of a number of blobs. Assuming most groups contain only one person, the largest peak corresponds to the most common width, which corresponds to the average width of a single person in the designated region. Similarly, the second largest peak corresponds to the average width of two people in the designated region, and the third largest peak corresponds to the average width of three people in the designated region.
Block 91 is the same as block 23 in
In block 92, archived video primitives are accessed. The video primitives are archived in block 43 of
Blocks 93 and 94 are the same as blocks 44 and 45 in
As an exemplary application, the invention can be used to analyze retail market space by measuring the efficacy of a retail display. Large sums of money are injected into retail displays in an effort to be as eye-catching as possible to promote sales of both the items on display and subsidiary items. The video surveillance system of the invention can be configured to measure the effectiveness of these retail displays.
For this exemplary application, the video surveillance system is set up by orienting the field of view of a video sensor towards the space around the desired retail display. During tasking, the operator selects an area representing the space around the desired retail display. As a discriminator, the operator defines that he or she wishes to monitor people-sized objects that enter the area and either exhibit a measurable reduction in velocity or stop for an appreciable amount of time.
After operating for some period of time, the video surveillance system can provide reports for market analysis. The reports can include: the number of people who slowed down around the retail display; the number of people who stopped at the retail display; the breakdown of people who were interested in the retail display as a function of time, such as how many were interested on weekends and how many were interested in evenings; and video snapshots of the people who showed interest in the retail display. The market research information obtained from the video surveillance system can be combined with sales information from the store and customer records from the store to improve the analysts understanding of the efficacy of the retail display.
The embodiments and examples discussed herein are non-limiting examples.
The invention is described in detail with respect to various embodiments, and it will now be apparent from the foregoing to those skilled in the art that changes and modifications may be made without departing from the invention in its broader aspects, and the invention, therefore, as defined in the claims is intended to cover all such changes and modifications as fall within the true spirit of the invention.
This application claims priority to and is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/203,065 filed Mar. 10, 2014, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/300,581 filed on Dec. 15, 2005, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/057,154, filed on Feb. 15, 2005, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/987,707, filed on Nov. 15, 2001, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/694,712, filed on Oct. 24, 2000 (based on which U.S. Pat. No. 6,954,498 issued on Oct. 11, 2005), all of which are incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3812278 | Aker | May 1974 | A |
| 3812287 | Lemelson | May 1974 | A |
| 3988533 | Mick et al. | Oct 1976 | A |
| 4160998 | Kamin | Jul 1979 | A |
| 4198653 | Kamin | Apr 1980 | A |
| 4249207 | Harman et al. | Feb 1981 | A |
| 4257063 | Loughry et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
| 4458266 | Mahoney | Jul 1984 | A |
| 4593274 | Rizzo | Jun 1986 | A |
| 4737847 | Araki et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
| 4764971 | Sullivan | Aug 1988 | A |
| 4857912 | Everett et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
| 4908704 | Fujioka et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
| 4941182 | Patel | Jul 1990 | A |
| 4943854 | Shiota et al. | Jul 1990 | A |
| 4949389 | Allebach et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
| 5048095 | Bhanu et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
| 5091780 | Pomerlau | Feb 1992 | A |
| 5099322 | Gove | Mar 1992 | A |
| 5159647 | Burt | Oct 1992 | A |
| 5161107 | Mayeaux et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
| 5229850 | Toyoshima | Jul 1993 | A |
| 5296852 | Rathi | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5321396 | Lamming et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
| 5448315 | Soohoo | Sep 1995 | A |
| 5448651 | Sakou et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
| 5465115 | Conrad et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
| 5485611 | Astle | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5491511 | Odle | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5515453 | Hennessey et al. | May 1996 | A |
| 5519789 | Etoh | May 1996 | A |
| 5521634 | McGary | May 1996 | A |
| 5526133 | Paff | Jun 1996 | A |
| 5576972 | Harrison | Nov 1996 | A |
| 5586200 | Devaney et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
| 5602585 | Dickinson | Feb 1997 | A |
| 5610653 | Abecassis | Mar 1997 | A |
| 5621889 | Lermuzeaux et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5623249 | Camire | Apr 1997 | A |
| 5666157 | Aviv | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5671294 | Rogers | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5684715 | Palmer | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5696503 | Nasburg | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5696551 | Katto | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5708767 | Yeo et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5721692 | Nagaya et al. | Feb 1998 | A |
| 5724456 | Boyack et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
| 5751346 | Dozier et al. | May 1998 | A |
| 5764306 | Steffano | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5768413 | Levin | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5774569 | Waldenmaier | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5798787 | Yamaguchi et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
| 5801943 | Nasburg | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5802203 | Black et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5802361 | Wang et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5844603 | Ogata | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5850352 | Moezzi et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5860086 | Crump et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 5872865 | Normile et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5875304 | Winter et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5875305 | Winter et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5886701 | Chauvin et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
| 5912980 | Hunke | Jun 1999 | A |
| 5923365 | Tamir et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5926210 | Hackett et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
| 5937092 | Wootton et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
| 5956081 | Katz et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5959690 | Toebes, VIII et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
| 5963202 | Polish | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5963203 | Goldberg et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5969755 | Courtney | Oct 1999 | A |
| 5983147 | Krumm | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5983251 | Martens et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5987211 | Abecassis | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5990955 | Koz | Nov 1999 | A |
| 5999189 | Kajiya et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 5999877 | Takahasi et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6008865 | Fogel | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6014461 | Hennessey et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6025877 | Chang et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6028626 | Aviv | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6031573 | MacCormack et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6044166 | Bassman et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
| 6049363 | Courtney et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
| 6058210 | Dequeiroz et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6067112 | Wellner et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6069653 | Hudson | May 2000 | A |
| 6069655 | Seeley et al. | May 2000 | A |
| 6075560 | Katz | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6078619 | Monro | Jun 2000 | A |
| 6084912 | Reitmier et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6088484 | Mead | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6091771 | Seeley et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6091846 | Lin et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
| 6097429 | Seeley et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6108033 | Ito et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6123123 | Carder et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
| 6128396 | Hasegawa et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6128398 | Kuperstein et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6144375 | Jain et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6151413 | Jang et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6166744 | Jaszlics et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6167143 | Badique | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6177886 | Billington et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6182022 | Mayle et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6188381 | van der Wal et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6188777 | Darrell et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6195458 | Warnick et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
| 6201473 | Schaffer | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6201476 | Depeursinge et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6205239 | Lin et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6211907 | Scaman et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6226388 | Qian et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6249613 | Crinon et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6278466 | Chen | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6297844 | Schatz et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6304669 | Kaneko et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6307885 | Moon et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6310916 | Han et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6326964 | Snyder et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6337917 | Onural et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6411724 | Vaithilingham et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6349113 | Mech et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6351265 | Bulman | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6351492 | Kim et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
| 6360234 | Jain et al. | Mar 2002 | B2 |
| 6385772 | Courtney | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6393054 | Altunbasak et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6396535 | Waters | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6396876 | Babonneau | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6396961 | Wixson et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6404455 | Ito et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6404925 | Foote et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6408293 | Aggarwal et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6411209 | Lyons et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6411734 | Bachelder et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6424370 | Courtney | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6437819 | Loveland | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6441734 | Gutta et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
| 6456320 | Kuwano et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
| 6469734 | Nichani et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6490370 | Krasinski et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
| 6504479 | Lemons et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6509926 | Mills et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6515615 | Burchett et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6525658 | Streetman et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6525663 | Colmenarez et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
| 6535620 | Wildes et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
| 6539396 | Bowman-Amuah | Mar 2003 | B1 |
| 6542840 | Okamoto et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6545706 | Edwards et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6546115 | Ito et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6546135 | Lin et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6552826 | Adler et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
| 6570496 | Britton et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
| 6570608 | Tseng | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6570610 | Kipust | May 2003 | B1 |
| 6573907 | Madrane | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6584211 | Amemiya et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 6587574 | Jeannin | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6597800 | Murray et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6625310 | Lipton et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6628323 | Wegmann | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6628835 | Brill et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6646676 | DaGraca et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6658136 | Brumitt | Dec 2003 | B1 |
| 6696945 | Venetianer et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6697103 | Fernandez et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6697104 | Yakobi et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6698021 | Amini et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6707486 | Millet et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6707852 | Wang | Mar 2004 | B1 |
| 6721454 | Qian et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6724915 | Toklu | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6727938 | Randall | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6738424 | Allmen et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6741977 | Nagaya et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
| 6754367 | Ito et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6757328 | Huang et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
| 6792319 | Bilger | Sep 2004 | B1 |
| 6801662 | Owechko et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6807361 | Girgensohn et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6816184 | Brill et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 6816186 | Luke et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6829371 | Nichani et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
| 6844818 | Grech-Cini et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6859803 | Dagtas et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6865580 | Bush | Mar 2005 | B1 |
| 6901110 | Tsougarakis | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6924801 | Dorbie | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6930689 | Giacalone et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
| 6940397 | Le Mire | Sep 2005 | B1 |
| 6940998 | Garoutte | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6954498 | Lipton | Oct 2005 | B1 |
| 6954859 | Simerly et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
| 6963658 | Hagihara et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 6970083 | Venetianer et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
| 6975220 | Foodman et al. | Dec 2005 | B1 |
| 6975346 | Kumhyr | Dec 2005 | B2 |
| 6985620 | Sawhney et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6987451 | Mckeown et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6987528 | Nagahisa et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
| 6987883 | Lipton et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7023469 | Olson | Apr 2006 | B1 |
| 7035430 | Ito et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7082209 | Ito et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
| 7110569 | Brodsky et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
| 7146286 | Takeda et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7167519 | Comaniciu et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7167575 | Nichani et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
| 7184777 | Diener et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
| 7197072 | Hsu et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
| 7218756 | Garoutte | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7224852 | Lipton et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7227893 | Srinivasa et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
| 7283034 | Nakamura et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
| 7308443 | Lee et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
| 7319479 | Crabtree et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
| 7356830 | Dimitrova | Apr 2008 | B1 |
| 7358976 | Hampshire, II et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7373395 | Brailean et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
| 7400344 | Ito et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
| 7423666 | Sakakibara et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7436887 | Yeredor | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7440589 | Garoutte | Oct 2008 | B2 |
| 7424167 | Chosak et al. | Nov 2008 | B1 |
| 7447331 | Brown et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7468662 | Velipasalar et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7487072 | Semple et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7522745 | Grasso et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
| 7595815 | Donovan et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
| 7602413 | Kondo et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7613324 | Venetianer et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7623677 | Girgensohn et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
| 7633520 | Samarasekera et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7643653 | Garoutte | Jan 2010 | B2 |
| 7650058 | Garoutte | Jan 2010 | B1 |
| 7653635 | Paek et al. | Jan 2010 | B1 |
| 7657914 | Whelan et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7660439 | Lu et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
| 7683929 | Elazar et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
| 7733369 | Yin et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7734724 | Rezvani et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7737837 | Donovan et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
| 7768549 | Cofer et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7774326 | Arrouye et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7796780 | Lipton et al. | Sep 2010 | B2 |
| 7822224 | Garoutte et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
| 7823066 | Kuramura | Oct 2010 | B1 |
| 7825954 | Zhang et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
| 7868912 | Venetianer et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
| 7884849 | Yin et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
| 7932923 | Lipton et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 7956735 | Jackson et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
| 20010004739 | Sekiguchi et al. | Jun 2001 | A1 |
| 20010010542 | Takagi et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
| 20010019357 | Ito et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
| 20010033330 | Garoutte | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010035907 | Broemmelsiek | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20020008758 | Broemmelsiek et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
| 20020024446 | Grech-Cini | Feb 2002 | A1 |
| 20020048388 | Hagihara et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
| 20020051058 | Ito et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020063154 | Hoyos et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020082769 | Church et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
| 20020095490 | Barker et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
| 20020135483 | Merheim et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020141637 | Brodsky et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020150308 | Nakamura | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020159634 | Lipton et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020163521 | Ellenby et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020163577 | Myers | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020171546 | Evans et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
| 20020191851 | Keinan | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030010345 | Koblasz et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030020808 | Luke et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030025599 | Monroe | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030043160 | Elfving et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030051255 | Bulman et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030053659 | Pavlidis et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030058111 | Lee | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030058340 | Lin et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030058341 | Brodsky et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030085992 | Arpa et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030093260 | Dagtas | May 2003 | A1 |
| 20030126622 | Cohen et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030163289 | Whelan et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030174773 | Comaniciu et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030231769 | Bolle et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
| 20040113933 | Guler | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040130620 | Buehler et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040137915 | Diener et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143602 | Ruiz | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040151374 | Lipton et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040161133 | Elazar | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040225681 | Chaney et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040240542 | Yeredor et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20040240546 | Wells | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050002561 | Monachino et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050146605 | Lipton et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050157169 | Brodsky et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050162515 | Venetianer et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050168574 | Lipton et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050169367 | Venetianer et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050198063 | Thomas et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050275549 | Barclay et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060066722 | Yin et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060117356 | Jojic et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060200842 | Chapman et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060222209 | Zhang et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060232673 | Lipton et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060268111 | Zhang et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060279630 | Aggarwal et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070002141 | Lipton et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070013776 | Venetianer et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070035623 | Garoutte et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070052803 | Chosak et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20070122000 | Venetianer et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
| 20070127774 | Zhang et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070182818 | Buehler | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20080292140 | Morris et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20080317286 | Thorpe et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
| 20090244291 | Saptharishi et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20100020172 | Mariadoss et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 2388012 | Apr 2000 | CA |
| 4430016 | Feb 1996 | DE |
| 4430016 | Feb 1996 | DE |
| 19848490 | Apr 2000 | DE |
| 10153484 | May 2003 | DE |
| 10252731 | May 2004 | DE |
| 0293189 | Nov 1988 | EP |
| 0893923 | Jan 1999 | EP |
| 0913799 | May 1999 | EP |
| 0967584 | Dec 1999 | EP |
| 1024666 | Aug 2000 | EP |
| 1120746 | Aug 2001 | EP |
| 1333682 | Aug 2003 | EP |
| 1345420 | Sep 2003 | EP |
| 1916618 | Apr 2008 | EP |
| 2944934 | Oct 2010 | FR |
| 2337146 | Oct 1999 | GB |
| 2379354 | Mar 2003 | GB |
| 03-242592 | Feb 1990 | JP |
| 1991-035399 | Feb 1991 | JP |
| 1991-242592 | Oct 1991 | JP |
| 05-014891 | Jan 1993 | JP |
| 1993-284501 | Oct 1993 | JP |
| 1994-52311 | Feb 1994 | JP |
| 1994-76047 | Mar 1994 | JP |
| 07-160891 | Jun 1995 | JP |
| 1995-302328 | Nov 1995 | JP |
| 1996-63599 | Mar 1996 | JP |
| 08-123935 | May 1996 | JP |
| 08-136251 | May 1996 | JP |
| 1996-136251 | May 1996 | JP |
| 1996-171681 | Jul 1996 | JP |
| 08-272926 | Oct 1996 | JP |
| 09-050585 | Feb 1997 | JP |
| 09-130783 | May 1997 | JP |
| 09-252467 | Sep 1997 | JP |
| 9247654 | Sep 1997 | JP |
| 1997-265539 | Oct 1997 | JP |
| 09-330415 | Dec 1997 | JP |
| H10-048008 | Feb 1998 | JP |
| 1-177195 | May 1998 | JP |
| 10-116359 | May 1998 | JP |
| 1998-116359 | May 1998 | JP |
| 10-283584 | Oct 1998 | JP |
| 10-290448 | Oct 1998 | JP |
| H10-290449 | Oct 1998 | JP |
| 1999-015982 | Jan 1999 | JP |
| 11-177973 | Jun 1999 | JP |
| 11-203568 | Jul 1999 | JP |
| 01-244598 | Sep 1999 | JP |
| 1999-355759 | Dec 1999 | JP |
| 2000-175174 | Jun 2000 | JP |
| 11-009618 | Jul 2000 | JP |
| 11-009619 | Jul 2000 | JP |
| 2000-207664 | Jul 2000 | JP |
| 2000-207665 | Jul 2000 | JP |
| 2000-224542 | Aug 2000 | JP |
| 11-48585 | Sep 2000 | JP |
| 2000-253382 | Sep 2000 | JP |
| 11-88337 | Oct 2000 | JP |
| 11-101117 | Oct 2000 | JP |
| 2000-285223 | Oct 2000 | JP |
| 2000-287173 | Oct 2000 | JP |
| 2000-295600 | Oct 2000 | JP |
| 2000-339923 | Dec 2000 | JP |
| 2001-045465 | Feb 2001 | JP |
| 2001-145092 | May 2001 | JP |
| 2001-175868 | Jun 2001 | JP |
| 2001-189925 | Jul 2001 | JP |
| 2001-204007 | Jul 2001 | JP |
| 2001-266131 | Sep 2001 | JP |
| 2001-285681 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2001-292439 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2004-23487 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 1999-0042072 | May 1998 | KR |
| 100248374 | Dec 1999 | KR |
| 1020000026757 | May 2000 | KR |
| 535120 | Jun 2003 | TW |
| 592663 | Jun 2004 | TW |
| I240898 | Oct 2005 | TW |
| WO 1994003014 | Feb 1994 | WO |
| WO 9819450 | May 1998 | WO |
| WO 0028498 | May 2000 | WO |
| WO 0133503 | May 2001 | WO |
| WO 0162005 | Aug 2001 | WO |
| WO 03044727 | Jul 2002 | WO |
| WO 03047258 | Jun 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004006184 | Jan 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004047039 | Jun 2004 | WO |
| WO 2008054489 | Apr 2008 | WO |
| WO 2004006184 | May 2008 | WO |
| WO 2009120616 | Oct 2009 | WO |
| WO 2010076261 | Jul 2010 | WO |
| WO 2011036661 | Mar 2011 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Guha, P; Mukerjee, A; Venkatesh, K S; “Efficient occlusion handling for multiple agent tracking by reasoning with surveillance event primatives,” Visual Surveillance and Performance Evaluration of Tracking and Surveillance, 2005. 2nd Joint IEEE International Workshop on, pp. 49-56, Oct. 15-16, 2005. |
| M. D. Beynon, D. J. Van Hook, M. Seibert, A. Peacock and D. Dudgeon, “Detecting abandoned packages in a multi-camera video surveillance system,” Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Advanced Video and Signal Based Surveillance, 2003., 2003, pp. 221-228. doi: 10.1109/AVSS.2003.1217925. |
| Opposition Proceeding from the EPO for EP 1872583. |
| Office Action from the European Patent Office dated Jan. 14, 2014. |
| Didier et al., “Time-scale change detection applied to real-time abnormal stationarity monitoring.” Real-Time Imaging, vol. 10, Issue 1, Feb. 2004, pp. 9-22. |
| Stringa et al., “Content-based retrieval and real time detection from video sequences acquired by surveillance systems.” Image Processing, 1998. ICIP 98. Proceedings. 1998 International Conference on, pp. 138-142 vol. 3, Oct. 4-7, 1998. doi: 10-1109/ICIP.1998.727153. |
| Young et al. “PETS metrics: on-line performance evaluation service.” Visual Surveillance and Performance Evaluation of Tracking and Surveillance, 2005. 2nd joint IEEE International Workshop on, pp. 317-324, Oct. 15-16, 2005. |
| Desurmont et al., “A Seamless Modular Approach for Real-Time Video Analysis for Surveillance.” Image Analysis for Multimedia Interactive Services, Workshop on, 2004. |
| Fuentes et al., “Tracking People for Automatic Surveillance Applications.” Part of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis, 2003. |
| Regazzoni et al., Advanced Video-Based Surveillance Systems Chapter 4, pp. 165-178 “Remote Detection of Abandoned Objects in unattended Railway Stations by using a DS/CDM”; 1999; The Springer International Series in Engineering and Computer Science. |
| Sacchi et al., “A distributed surveillance system for detection of abandoned objects in unmanned railway environments,” Vehicular Technology, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 49, No. 5, pp. 2013, 2026, Sep. 2000. |
| Computer & Information Systems Abstracts, Keeping an Eye Out, 2005. |
| Computer & Information Systems Abstracts, ObjectVideo Extends its Capabilities for Border Applications as Part of Multi-Million Dollar Homeland Security Advanced Research Project Agency Grant, 2006. |
| Computer & Information Systems Abstracts, QA: Security Grants Up for Grabs, 2004. |
| CSA, Veni, Vidi, Vici Analytics: But Who Will Really Conquer?, 2007. |
| Dialog, Ex FCC Chief Makes Cisco Board an Even Dozen, Mar. 26, 2007. |
| Dialog, Iridium Names VP for Data Business, Jul. 9, 2001. |
| Diamond Back, (2) Digest, Jan. 27, 2000. |
| Elsevier Eng. Info. Inc., Threat Detection Expands Role, Jul. 20, 2006. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Airport Selects ObjectVideo for Intrusion Detection, Jun. 29, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Appian Names Novak Biddle and MapQuest Exec to Its Board, Oct. 23, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Avinor Selects ESP Group and ObjectVideo for Surveillance at Norwegian Airports, May 5, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Bosch Security Systems Utilizes ObjectVideo's Intelligent Video Surveillance Software, Apr. 6, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Chubb Security Taps ObjectVideo as Approved Supplier, Jul. 8, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Companies in the News Today: About Chubb Security, Jul. 8, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Companies in the News Today: About ObjectVideo Inc., Jul. 8, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, comScore Names Kenneth Tarpey as CFO, Apr. 26, 2009. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Cornet Offers iVDO SmartEdge Video Analytics for its Ruggedized iVDO IP Encoders, May 4, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, CoVi Technologies Adds Digital Video Analytics to Analog Video Surveillance Camera, Sep. 30, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Digiop Inks OEM Partnership with ObjectVideo, Apr. 30, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Does the eye spy? Around-the-clock video surveillance is the Holy Grail of K-12 safety efforts. But it raises many questions, including whether or not the cameras are a wholly benign presence., Nov. 1, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Fibridge's New HD, IP Camera Leverages Reference Design from TI and ZOT, Dec. 13, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Former FCC Chairman Powell Joins ObjectVideo Board of Directors, Sep. 9, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Intelligent IP Camera Features Onboard Analytics, Apr. 13, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Intelligent Video Server Promotes OEM Camera Development, Apr. 30, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Lanaccess' Encoders to Include ObjectVideo's Analytics, Sep. 21, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, MangoDSP and ObjectVideo to Provide Integrated Intelligent Video Surveillance Platforms, Apr. 10, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, MangoDSP, ObjectVideo Join Forces on Surveillance Solutions, Apr. 7, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Next Steps for Technology: How U.S. R&D Efforts Have Pushed Development Forward, Sep. 11, 2006. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo and TI Get Win with Hangzhou Hikvision Digital Technology, Apr. 1, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Develops New Scanning Camera Technology to Protect U.S. Borders, Jul. 19, 2006. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Gets $3.2 Million Pacts from Homeland Security Advanced Research Project Agency (HSARPA), May 13, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Gets DARPA Contract to Support Next Generation Surveillance System, Jan. 28, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Named 2005 “Technology Pioneer,” Dec. 6, 2004. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Named a Red Herring 100 Company for Second Year in a Row, May 13, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Offers Intelligent Video Network Protocol for Standardized Analytics Communication and Integration, Sep. 25, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Provides Intelligent Video Software to Port, Jul. 13, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Releases OnBoard Analytics on ARM Processors, Apr. 5, 2011. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Releases Software for Intel Architecture Systems, Apr. 21, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Signs Distributor for Asia, Dec. 14, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Software Part of Security System at Memphis/Shelby County Airport, Jun. 21, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo to Showcase the Latest Intelligent Solutions at ASIS, Sep. 23, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo to Spotlight Intelligent Solutions at ISC West 2007, Mar. 26, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo Touts Early Adoption of its Protocol, Mar. 31, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, ObjectVideo, Security Services & Technologies Announce Integration Partnership, Apr. 6, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, People in Wireless News: Peter Currie Joins Critical Path Board, Feb. 2, 2004. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Phoenix IVS, ObjectVideo and MangoDP to Launch Intelligent Video Module, Aug. 10, 2005. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Proximex Upgrades Surveillint, Dec. 21, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Puerto Rico Public Housing Beefs Up Security Via Intelligent Surveillance System from Avant Technologies and ObjectVideo, Sep. 19, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Software Creates Intelligent Devices for Video Systems, Mar. 31, 2006. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Software Delivers Industry-Specific Intelligent Video, May 10, 2006. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Synectic Systems Group and ObjectVideo Ink OEM Pact, Feb. 28, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Video—DSPs Focus on Vision Systems, May 21, 2007. |
| Gale/ Cengage, VidSys Partners with Security Companies for PSIM Thought Leadership Site, Oct. 23, 2008. |
| Gale/ Cengage, Wireless Channel: Chubb Security to Resell ObjectVideo Technology, Jul. 9, 2005. |
| Information Week, Curtis Joins CMGI, May 8, 2000. |
| Lipton, Stationary Target Detection Using the ObjectVideo Surveillance System, 2007. |
| Lipton, The Intelligent Vision Sensor: Turning Video into Information, 2007. |
| Lipton, Video Verification of Point of Sale Transactions, 2007. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 81276, A Unified Framework for False Alarm Reduction Using Scene Context from Airborne Sensors, Identification No. 075B2-0308, W31P4Q-08-C-0108, 2007. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 63547, Automated Video Surveillance at Night, Identification No. 03ST1-004, DAAH0103CR276, 2003. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 82715, Context-Sensitive Content Extraction and Scene Understanding, Identification No. N071-085-0199, N00014-08-C-0639, 2007. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 65022, Human Activity Recognition, Identification No. N031-1723, N00014-03-M-0256, 2003. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 76719, Identify and Track Important Assets, Identification No. S052-007-0063, H92222-06-P-0012, 2005. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 78523, Intelligent Retrieval of Surveillance Imagery, Identification No. N062-147-0567, N00014-08-C0110, 2006. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 59579, Mast-Mounted In-Port Video Surveillance System, Identification No. N021-1610; N00014-03-C-0232, 2002. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 83229, Robust Multiple Target Tracking, Identification No. A074-007-0091, W911NF-08-C-0068, 2007. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for National Science Foundation Award No. 69404, SBIR Phase I: Learning Context, Identification No. 0340175, 0340175, 2004. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 58472, Streaming Multimedia for the Warfighter, Identification No. 99SB1-0357, DAAH01-02-C-R193, 2002. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 55489, Video Detection, Tracking and Classification, Identification No. 99ST1-004, 2001-2002. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for Department of Defense Award No. 85007, Wide Area Video Motion Blur Elimination, Identification No. 08ST1-0147, W31P4Q-08-C-0470, 2008. |
| ObjectVideo, Amtrak Lags in Implementing Security Technologies: Madrid Attacks Refocus Attention on Passenger Rail System's Vulnerability, Lack of DHS Funding, Mar. 22, 2004. |
| ObjectVideo, Homeland Security Getting Tough on Borders, 2003. |
| ObjectVideo, Security Grants Up for Grabs, Mar. 8, 2004. |
| The Institution of Engineering and Technology, Automatic Visual Analysis for Transportation Security, 2007. |
| The Thomson Corp., I2T: Image Parsing to Text Description, 2010. |
| The Thomson Corp., Video Compression Using Spatiotemporal Regularity Flow, 2006. |
| Balluck, Northern Virginia Web Warriers Battle for Charity, Washtech.com, Jan. 25, 2001, http://www.tvworldwide.com/media_012501_washtec.asp. |
| Diamond Back, Curtis Joins CMGI, May 8, 2000. |
| Jackson, Video AI Tool Watches Border Crossings, Aug. 25, 2003. |
| New Media, (2) Digest, Jan. 27, 2000. |
| Allmen et al., Long-Range Spatiotemporal Motion Understanding Using Spatiotemporal Flow Curves, Dec. 1990, pp. 1-29. |
| Braggins, Computer Vision for Industry, European Optical Society Proceedings, Jun. 24, 1993, pp. 226-239. |
| Rota et al., Activity Recognition from Video Sequences Using Declarative Models, 5 pages. (samsung date as 2005). |
| Velipasalar et al., Specifying, Interpreting and Detecting High-Level, Spatio-Temporal Composite Events in Single and Multi-Camera Systems, pp. 1-8. |
| Wang et al., “Experiential Sampling for Video Surveillance,” In Proc. 1 st ACM Int. Workshop on Video Surveillance, Nov. 7, 2003, pp. 77-86. |
| Ghanem et al., Representation and Recognition of Events in Surveillance Video Using Petri Nets, pp. 1-9. |
| Cheng et al., A Smart Camera Application: DSP-Based People Detection and Tracking, J. Electron. Imaging, vol. 9, Jul. 2000, pp. 336-346. |
| Grimson et al., Using Adaptive Tracking to Classify and Monitor Activities in a Site, 1997, pp. 1-8. |
| Grimson, et al., “Using adaptive tracking to classify and monitor activities in a site,” Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 246-252, 1999. |
| Lipton et al., Moving Target Classification and Tracking from Real-Time Video, 1998, pp. 8-14. |
| Makris, Visual Learning in Surveillance System, May 2001, pp. 1-27. |
| Jain, Dynamic Scene Analysis, Jan. 1, 1984, pp. 1-36. |
| Yogameena et al., RVM-Based Human Action Classification in Crowd through Projection and Star Skeletonization, EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing vol. 2009, Aug. 26, 2009, 12 pages. |
| Marcenaro et al., Distributed Architectures and Logical-Task Decomposition in Multimedia Surveillance Systems, Oct. 2001, pp. 1419-1440. |
| Moellman, Automated Video Surveillance with Unattended Ground Sensors, 1997, pp. 68-75. |
| Haritaoglu, W4 A Real-Time System for Detection and Tracking of People and Monitoring Their Activities (Thesis), 1999, pp. 1-113. |
| Chleq et al., Realtime Image Sequence Interpretation for Video-Surveillance Applications, 1996 Proceedings, International Conference on Image Processing, vol. 2, pp. 801-804. |
| Örten, Moving Object Identification and Event Recognition in Video Surveillance Systems (Thesis), Jul. 2005, pp. 1-73. |
| Atick et al., FaceIt: Face Recognition from Static and Live Video for Law Enforcement, Mar. 1997, pp. 176-187. |
| Ivanov et al., Recognition of Visual Activities and Interactions by Stochastic Parsing, Aug. 2000, pp. 1-21. |
| Michon, Integrating Motion Video into Computational Environments, Oct. 1989, pp. 80-82. |
| Vaswani et al., Statistical Shape Theory for Activity Modeling, 4 pages. |
| Stricker et al., Video Assist: A Customizable Tool for Analyzing Video Data, 1997, pp. 209-218. |
| Liu, A New Network-Based Intelligent Surveillance System, 2000, pp. 1187-1192. |
| Dimitrova et al., Motion Recovery for Video Content Classification, Oct. 1995, pp. 408-439. |
| Wang et al., “A Video Analysis Framework for Soft Biometry Security Surveillance,” Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), 2009 Workshop on, Nov. 11, 2005, pp. 71-78. |
| Xiang et al., Activity Based Surveillance Video Content Modelling, Jul. 1, 1997, pp. 2309-2326. |
| Brémond et al., Issues of Representing Context Illustrated by Video-Surveillance Applications, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies—Special issue: using context in applications, vol. 48 Issue 3, Mar. 1998, pp. 375-391. |
| Tian et al., IBM Smart Surveillance System (S3): Event Based Video Surveillance System with an Open and Extensible Framework, 30 pages. |
| Cheyer et al., MVIEWS: Multimodal Tools for the Video Analyst, 1998, pp. 55-62, available at http://www.iuiconf.org/98pdf/1998-001-0009.pdf. |
| Setchell, Applications of Computer Vision to Road-Traffic Monitoring, Sep. 1997, pp. 1-170. |
| Business Wire, Ivex Appoints Richard Kramer Vice President, Engineering, Jun. 27, 2000. |
| The Jerusalem Report, Smile, You're on Surveillance Camera, Jun. 16, 2003. |
| Business Wire, Vidient Systems Debuts with Powerful New Video Surveillance Software, Features Sophisticated Behavior Analysis Capabilities, Sep. 27, 2004. |
| Aimetis Corp., Aira Hardware Requirements, Apr. 20, 2006. |
| Business Wire, Ivex's ViewOps Expands Beyond Security, Sep. 11, 2000. |
| Leininger et al., Autonomous Real-Time Ground Ubiquitous Surveillance—Imaging System (ARGUS-IS), 2008, pp. 1-11. |
| Lipton et al., ObjectVideo Forensics: Activity-Based Video Indexing and Retrieval for Physical Security Applications, 2004, pp. 56-60. |
| Taylor et al., OVVV: Using Virtual Worlds to Design and Evaluate Surveillance Systems, 2007, 8 pages. |
| Impaq IDVR 16E/AV Tech AV777 DVR. |
| NexWatch, ProWatch 3 Release 6 Integral DVXi Digital Video Recorder Integration, pp. 1-13. |
| Lipton et al., ComMode: An Algorithm for Video Background Modeling and Object Segmentation, Dec. 2002, pp. 1603-1608. |
| Security Magazine, GE Security (Corporate Profiles) (Brief Article), Aug. 1, 2004. |
| UBM, LLC, A Vote for I.T.—The Message from Both Candidates is Clear: IT Matters in Business, the Economy, and the Upcoming Election, Jul. 19, 2004. |
| UBM, LLC, Case Study: Artificial Intelligence—On the Border of Technology's Reach, Jun. 7, 2004. |
| UBM, LLC, Let's Get Physical, Mar. 22, 2004. |
| UBM, LLC, Texas Instruments and ObjectVideo—Video Content Analysis Algorithms for Digital Media Processors, Nov. 29, 2004. |
| Bruno, DiamondBack Changes Name, Business, Aug. 3, 2001. |
| Bruno, DiamondBack Confirms $8.5M Financing, Jan. 12, 2001. |
| Bruno, DiamondBack to Close on $8.5MIL Friday, Jan. 11, 2001. |
| Hardesty, Video Objectification: New Tools Have Computers Seeing Things, Apr. 2002. |
| Haering et al., The Evolution of Video Surveillance: An Overview, Jun. 19, 2008, pp. 279-290. |
| GE Interlogix, VideoIQ™ Product Data Sheet, Jan. 2004, pp. 1-4. |
| Collins et al., Algorithms for Cooperative Multisensor Surveillance, Oct. 2001, pp. 1456-1477. |
| Kanade et al., Cooperative Multi-Sensor Video Surveillance, May 1997, pp. 3-10. |
| Fengjun, Lb, et al., “Self-Calibration of a Camera from Video of a Walking Human,” 2002 Proceedings, 16th International Conference Pattern Recognition, vol. 1, pp. 562-567. |
| Sony Electronics Inc., Sony IP Video Monitoring, High Performance Digital Security Solution, 2005, 8 pages. |
| Business Wire, Ivex Launches ViewOps Internet Video Service, Jun. 28, 2000. |
| Cernium Website, Cernium News & Events—Access Control & Security Systems—Cernium Signs Optiwise Solutions, Mar. 1, 2005. |
| Cernium Website, Perceptrak—Powerful, Information-Driven Video Surveillance, 2010. |
| ShopperTrak, ShopperTrak RCT Corporation: Fact Sheet, pp. 1-12. |
| Zhai et al., Composite Spatio-Temporal Event Detection in Multi-Camera Surveillance Networks, White Paper, IBM Thomas J. Watson Center, Hawthorne, NY, pp. 1-12. |
| PR Newswire, Cyntergy Provides Help Desk Services to ShopperTrak to Support Installation of its Orbit™ System, Jun. 7, 1999. |
| Security Management, The Secrets of CCTV, Aug. 1, 1993. |
| Security Distributing & Marketing Magazine, We Know It's Human. VideoIQ™ Delivers Where Motion Detection Comes Up Short, Oct. 1, 2003. |
| Ivex, User Manual: PC/PPC Viewer, pp. 1-13. |
| iVex ViewOps User Manual, IVEX Corporation, pp. 1-55. |
| M2 Presswire, Analog Devices: Analog Introduces First Wavelet Video Codecs Optimized for Surveillance & CCTV Apps., Sep. 15, 1998. |
| ShopperTrak, Orbit 5 Technology: The Future in Traffic Counting. |
| Cernium Website, Cernium News & Events—Cernium's Perceptrak Intelligent Video Management Systems Utilized in Johns Hopkins University Security Upgrade, May 24, 2005. |
| Business Wire, GVI Security Solutions Signs Agreement with Safeguards Video, LLC for Intelligent Video Threat Detection, Jan. 12, 2005. |
| Chicago Sun-Times, Tech Briefs, Aug. 27, 2002. |
| Security Distributing & Marketing Magazine, Advanced Video Surveillance System: Product Achievement Award for CCTV—ISC West (Top Products of 2003), Dec. 1, 2003. |
| Vidient, SmartCatch Analytics 3.0—Product Sheet, 2007, pp. 1-4. |
| VideoIQ Website, VideoIQ iCVR Cameras and Encoders—Introducing the Only Intelligent, Decentralized Surveillance Systems Contained Entirely Inside State-of-the-Art IP Cameras and Encoders, 2010, 4 pages. |
| Senior et al., Visual Person Searches for Retail Loss Detection: Application and Evaluation, 10 pages. |
| Ivex Launches First Programmable Streaming Multimedia Network Appliance (News Release), Apr. 5, 2001. |
| News Release, Ivex Launches First Programmable Streaming Multimedia Network Appliance, Apr. 5, 2001. |
| Cernium Website, Cernium News & Events—Securityinfowatch.com—ExitSentry Installed at Tulsa International Airport, Apr. 27, 2005. |
| GE Security, User Manual: DVMRe Simplex, May 2004, pp. 1-91. |
| Haritaoglu, Ghost3D: Detecting Body Posture and Parts Using Stereo, Feb. 28, 2003, pp. 1-35. |
| ioIMAGE Press Release, IoIMAGE to Showcase Performance-Breaking Intelligent Video Solutions at the Texas Instruments Developer Conference, Feb. 28, 2006. |
| Moin, High Tech Meets High Fashion, Jul. 9, 2003. |
| Business Wire, Ivex Launches First Programmable Streaming Multimedia Network Appliance, Apr. 5, 2001. |
| VideoIQ Website, VideoIQ View Video Management System, 2010, 2 pages. |
| Ivex, VSA1201: Wireless Video Streaming Appliance. |
| M2 Presswire, MRT: MRT Micro Launches Intelligent Observation Products for Business and Personal Applications, Feb. 11, 1999. |
| Ivex, User Manual: ViewOps Professional Software Plug-In for Intelligent Security Applications, 2000, pp. 1-38. |
| VisioWave Motion Sensor, pp. 1-4. |
| ioimage Website, ioi cam mmp100dn—Intelligent-Video 3 Megapixel IP PIP/Dual-View Color Day/Night Camera, pp. 1-5. |
| Ivex, Ivex Smart Video: Value Proposition, Jul. 6, 2001, pp. 1-10. |
| PR Newswire, Nice Systems Launches NiceVision, Dec. 10, 1998, 1 page. |
| Magee, “Tracking Multiple Vehicles using Foreground, Background, and Motion Models,” European Conference on Computer Vision, May 2002. |
| Huang, et al., “Image segmentation using temporal-spatial information in dynamic scenes,” Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Xi'an, Nov. 2-5, 2003. |
| McAllister, et al., “Towards a Non-Contact Driver-Vehicle Interface,” 2000 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference Proceedings, Oct. 2000, pp. 58-63. |
| McAllister, et al., “Tracking a Driver's Hands Using Computer Vision,” 2000 IEEE, pp. 1388-1393. |
| Stauffer, et al., “Learning patterns of activity using real-time tracking,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 22, No. 8, Aug. 2000. |
| Tian, et al., “Robust and Efficient Foreground Analysis for Real-time Video Surveillance,” Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE CVPR'05. |
| Hampapur et al., “Smart Video Surveillance,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, pp. 38-51 (2005). |
| Connell et al., “Detection and Tracking in the IBM PeopleVision System,” 2004 IEEE Conference on Multimedia and Expo, pp. 1403-1406 (2004). |
| Gong et al. A Generic Video Parsing System with a Scene Description Language (SDL), 1996, pp. 45-59. |
| Allmen, et al., “Long-Range Spatiotemporal Motion Understanding Using Spatiotemporal Flow Curves,” Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 303-309, 1991. |
| McLeod, Alastair, “Automated Video Surveillance: Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks,” Proc. SPIE 1989, 228 (1993). |
| Coifman et al., A Real-Time Computer Vision System for Vehicle Tracking and Traffic Surveillance, Dec. 3, 1998, pp. 271-288. |
| Collins et al., A System for Video Surveillance and Monitoring, May 2000, pp. 1-68. |
| Gavrilla, The Visual Analysis of Human Movement: A Survey, Jan. 1999, pp. 82-98. |
| Haritaoglu, A Real Time System for Detection and Tracking of People and Recognizing Their Activities, 1999, pp. 1-35. |
| Khan et al., Human Tracking in Multiple Cameras, 2001, pp. 331-336. |
| Kim, et al., “Real-time foreground-background segmentation using codebook model,” Real-time Imaging, vol. 11, issue 3, Jun. 2005. |
| Kuo et al., Design of Networked Visual Monitoring Systems, 1999, pp. 149-161. |
| Martins et al., A 3D Model Based Visual Surveillance System, Sep. 5-8, 2000, 6 pages. |
| Meguerdichian et al., Coverage Problems in Wireless Ad-Hoc Sensor Networks, 2001, pp. 1380-1387. |
| Olson et al., Moving Object Detection and Event Recognition Algorithms for Smart Cameras, 1997, pp. 159-175. |
| Stauffer, et al., “Adaptive background mixture models for real-time tracking,” Proceedings of IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 246-252, 1999. |
| Toyama, et al., “Wallflower: Principles and practice of background maintenance,” Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, vol. 1, pp. 255-261, 1999. |
| Wren et al., “Pfinder: Real-Time Tracking of the Human Body,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence Jul. 1997, pp. 780-785. |
| Grant et al., “Collection of Vehicle Activity Data by Video Detection for Use in Transportation Planning,” ITS Journal, May 2000, vol. 5, pp. 343-361. |
| ioimage Website, ioimage—ioibox—Intelligent Video Encoder Series. |
| Advanced Traffic Analysis Center Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute, “Autoscope Intersection Volume Reader,” Oct. 2007, pp. 1-8. |
| Econolite, “Autoscope Image Sensor—AIS-IV,” pp. 1-2. |
| Flow Traffic Limited, “Autoscope Video Vehicle Detection System Achievement List,” p. 1-69. |
| Klein, et al., Traffic Detector Handbook: Third Edition—vol. II, Chapter 5, pp. 1-31, Oct. 2006. |
| Kyte, et al., “Video-Based Traffic Data Collection,” Oct. 2000, pp. 1-42. |
| Lo et al., “Automatic Congestion Detection System for Underground Platforms,” Proceedings of 2001 International Symposium on Intelligent Multimedia, Video and Speech Processing, (Hong Kong, May 2001). |
| Panda, “An Integrated Video Sensor Design for Traffic Management and Control,” pp. 1-13, Jul. 1999. |
| Panda, et al., “Technology for Improved Operation and Maintenance of Video-Based Automated Incident Detection Sensors,” Jun. 2000, pp. 1-6. |
| Rehg et al., Ambiguities in Visual Tracking of Articulated Objects Using Two- and Three-Dimensional Models, Jun. 2003, pp. 393-418. |
| Reynhout, et al., “Acitvation of the 1-394 Laboratory for its Operational Testing: Phase I,” Dec. 1997, pp. 1-90. |
| Rossi et al., “Tracking and counting moving people,” Image Processing, 1994 Proceedings, ICIP-94, IEEE International Conference, vol. 3 (Nov. 1994). |
| Smith, et al., “Camera Positioning and Calibration Techniques for Integrating Traffic Surveillance Video Systems with Machine-Vision Vehicle Detection Devices,” Dec. 2002, pp. 1-20. |
| SRF Consulting Group, Inc., “Portable Traffic Management System Smart Work Zone Application,” May 1997, pp. 1-117. |
| Zhou et al., A Master-Slave System to Acquire Biometric Imagery of Humans at Distance, ACM International Workshop on Video Surveillance, Nov. 2003. |
| Marchesotti et al., A video Surveillance Architecture for Alarm Generation and Video Sequences Retrieval, 2002. |
| Bosch Respondent's Notice of Prior Art, Dec. 9, 2011. |
| Xiang et al., Activity Based Surveillance Video Content Modeling, Pattern Recognition, vol. 41, Iss. 7, Jul. 2008, pp. 2309-2326. |
| secureRus, Impaq IDVR 16E/AV Tech AV777 DVR, 2 pages. |
| VideoIQ, Search Results from HighBeam Research—16 Matching Articles, 2010. |
| Day et al., “Object Oriented Conceptual Modeling of Video Data” IEEE, 1995, pp. 401-408. |
| Day et et al., “Spatio-Temporal Modeling of Video Data for On-Line Object-Oriented Query Processing.” IEEE, 1995, pp. 98-105. |
| May 9, 2013 Chinese Office Action issued in related Chinese Application No. 200680019911.2. |
| European Third Party Observation Report issued in European Application No. 06749276.9-1232/1872583 dated Apr. 10, 2012. |
| Examination Report (EPO form 2905 01.91 TRI) issued in European Patent Application No. 02 752 397.6 dated May 30, 2012. |
| Communication (Reference Y18124/RW) re extended European search report issued in European Application No. 1215106.7-2218 dated May 23, 2012. |
| Communication (Reference Y18124/RW) re extended European search report issued in European Application No. 1215106.1-218 dated May 23, 2012. |
| First Office Action issued in Chinese Application No. 200680019911.2 dated Oct. 23, 2009. |
| Second Office Action issued in Chinese Application No. 200680019911.2 dated Dec. 23, 2011. |
| Office Action of Nov. 25, 2011 in related EPO Application No. 06-749 276.9-1232. |
| Abstract and documents related to the contract for DoD Award, Mast-mounted in-port Video Surveillance System, identification No. N02-073-03, N00014-02-M-0108. |
| Cucchiara et al., “Probabilistic Posture Classification for Human-Behavior Analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 42-54 (2005). |
| Cucchiara et al., “Using Computer Vision Techniques for Dangerous Situation Detection in Domestic Applications,” Intelligent Distributed Surveillance Systems, IEE, pp. 1-5 (2004). |
| Datta et al, “Person-on-person Violence Detection in Video Data,” Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, pp. 443-38 (2002). |
| Moeslund et al., “A Survey of Computer Vision-Based Human Motion Capture,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, vol. 81, pp. 231-268 (2001). |
| Ozer et al., “Real-Time Posture and Activity Recognition,” Proceedings of the Workshop on Motion and Video Computing, pp. 133-138 (2002). |
| Siebel et al., “On the Use of Colour Filtering in an Integrated Real-Time People Tracking System,” in Video-Based Surveillance Systems: Computer Vision and Distributed Processing, pp. 167-175 (Remagnino et al. eds., 2002). |
| Hotter et al., “Segmentation and tracking of multiple humans in complex situations,” Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2001. Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Computer Society Conference on vol. 2, pp. II-194-II-201, 2001. |
| Zhang, “SWIM: A Prototype Environment for Visual Media Retrieval,” Recent Developments in Computer Vision, Second Asian Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 531-540 (1995). |
| Ellen McCarthy, “A Firm That Lets Guards Keep an Electronic Eye Open,” Oct. 21, 2002. |
| Ivanov Y et al., “Video Surveillance of Interactions,” Visual Surveillance, 1999. Second IEEE Workshop on, (VS '99) Fort Collins, CO, USA, Jun. 26, 1999, Los Alamitos CA, USA, IEEE Computer Society US. |
| International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US08/09073, dated Nov. 3, 2008. |
| Written Opinion for International Patent Application No. PCT/US08/09073 dated Nov. 3, 2008. |
| Lipton, A., “Local Application of Optic Flow to Analyse Rigid Versus Non-Rigid Motion.” International Conference on Computer Vision, Corfu, Greece, Sep. 1999. |
| Bartolini et al., “Counting people getting in and out of a bus by real-time image-sequence processing,” IVC, 12(1):36-41, Jan. 1994. |
| Khoudour et al., “Real-Time Pedestrian Counting by Active Linear Cameras,” JEI, 5(4):452-459, Oct. 1996. |
| Ioffe et al., “Probabilistic Methods for Finding People,” ICJV, 43(1): 45-68, Jun. 2001. |
| Wixson, L., “Detecting Salient Motion by Accumulating Directionally Consistent Flow,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., vol. 22, pp. 774-781, Aug. 2000. |
| JP Office Action issued for JP 2003-546290 dated Oct. 9, 2007. |
| Jemez Technology Corp., Variant iD Web-Site, www.variantid.com, printed Aug. 25, 2003. |
| Wixson, L., “Detecting Salient Motion by Accumulating Directionally Consistent Flow,” IEEE, 1999. |
| Deparis et al., “A Device for Counting Passengers Making Use of Two Active Linear Cameras: Comparison of Algorithms,” IEEE, pp. 1629-1634, 1996. |
| Collins et al., “Using a DEM to Determine Geospatial Object Trajectories,” CMU-RI-TR-98-19, 1998. |
| International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US06/45625, dated Sep. 24, 2007. |
| Written Opinion for International Patent Application No. PCT/US06/45625, dated Sep. 24, 2007. |
| Selinger et al., “Classifying Moving Objects as Rigid and Non-Rigid Without Correspondences,” Proceedings of DARPA Image Understanding Workshop. 1, Nov. 1998, pp. 341-347. |
| Shio et al., “Segmentation of People in Motion,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 79, pp. 325-332. |
| International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US06/25196, dated Jan. 16, 2008. |
| Written Opinion for International Patent Application No. PCT/US06/25196, dated Jan. 16, 2008. |
| International Search Report for International Application No. PCT/US06/012556, dated Feb. 12, 2008. |
| Written Opinion for International Patent Application No. PCT/US06/012556, dated Feb. 12, 2008. |
| CN Office Action for CN 02822772.7 dated Oct. 14, 2005. |
| Aubert et al, “Time-scale change detection applied to real-time abnormal stationarity monitoring.” Real-Time Imaging, vol. 10, Issue 1, Feb. 2004, pp. 9-22, ISSN 1077-2014, 10.1016. |
| Stringa et al., “Content-based retrieval and real-time detection from video sequences acquired by surveillance systems.” Image Processing, 1998. ICIP 98, 1998 International Conference on, pp. 138-142, vol. 3, Oct. 4-7, 1998. |
| Young et al., “PETS metrics: on-line performance evaluation service.” Visual Surveillance and Performance Evaluation of Tracking Surveillance, 2005, 2nd Joint IEEE International Workshop on, pp. 317-324, Oct. 15-16, 2005. |
| Jain et al. “Metadata in Video Database.” ACM SIGMOD Record, vol. 23, No. 4, Dec. 1994, pp. 27-33. |
| European Office Action in EP Patent Application 12151067.1 dated Feb. 6, 2013. |
| Dialog Report, Technology VC Fund, Jan. 27, 2007. |
| Hotter et al., “Detection of Moving Objects in Natural Scenes by a Stochastic Multi-Feature Analysis of Video Sequences.” IEEE, 1995, pp. 47-52. |
| Haritaoglu et al., “Ghost: A Human Body Part Labeling System Using Silhouettes.” 14th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Aug. 1998, pp. 1-6. |
| Sony Corporation and Sony Electronics Inc., Dialog Report as submitted for U.S. International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-795, dated Mar. 2, 2012. 10 pages. |
| Sony Corporation and Sony Electronics Inc., Dialog Report as submitted for U.S. International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-795, dated Mar. 2, 2012. 77 pages. |
| Visiowave, Professional Software Plug-In for Intelligent Security Applications, 4 pages, date unknown. |
| Joint Claim Construction Chart, United States International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-795, dated Oct. 28, 2011, 59 pages. |
| Respondents Sony Corporation's and Sony Electronics Inc.'s Identification of Prior Art, United States International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-795, dated Dec. 9, 2011, 33 pages. |
| Respondents Samsung Techwin Co., Ltd. and Samsung Opto-Electronics America, Inc.'s Notice of Prior Art, United States International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-795, dated Dec. 9, 2011, 29 pages. |
| Notification for IL App. 161777 issued Feb. 21, 2008 and English translation thereof. |
| International Search Report Issued for PCT Application No. PCT/US01/32614 dated May 6, 2002. |
| International Search Report Issued for PCT Application No. PCT/US02/22688 dated Dec. 11, 2002. |
| International Search Report Issued for PCT Application No. PCT/US06/02700. |
| Taiwan IPO Search Report for Application No. 095104241 dated Mar. 31, 2012. |
| Australian Patent Office Examination Report for Application No. SG 200705914-0 dated Apr. 30, 2009. |
| Mexico Patent Office Action dated Mar. 4, 2010. |
| EP Search Report for Application No. 02752397.6 PCT/US02/22688 dated Oct. 29, 2014. |
| Mexico Patent Office Action dated May 25, 2010. |
| Communication from EPO (Ref. RW/Y3315) dated Apr. 1, 2010 for Application No. 02 752 397.6-2218. |
| Ali et al., Interactive Retrieval of Targets for Wide Area Surveillance, 2011. |
| Baker et al., Autonomous Vehicle Video Aided Navigation—Coupling INS and Video Approaches. |
| Cao et al., Automatic Geo-Registration for Port Surveillance, International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 2010. |
| Cao et al., Automatic Geo-Registration of Maritime Video Feeds, ICPR 2008. 19th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, 2008, p. 1-4. |
| Chemel et al., Cyclops: Miniature Robotic Reconnaissance System, May 1999, pp. 2298-2302, available at http://www.ri.cmu.edu/pub_files/1999/5 /ICRA_Cyclops_99.pdf. |
| Choe et al., Image Transformation for Object Tracking in High-Resolution Video, 2008, available at http://figment.cse.usf.edu/˜sfefilat/data/papers/ThAT8.5.pdf. |
| Chosak et al., Tide Filtering for Video Surveillance System, 2008. |
| Chun et al., Automatic Camera Calibration and Geo-Registration Using Objects that Provide Positional Information, 2011. |
| Egnal et al., Active Camera Video-Based Surveillance Systems and Methods, 2005. |
| Haering, A Portable Geo-Aware Visual Surveillance System for Vehicles, 2011. |
| Haering, A Semantic Event-Detection Approach and its Application to Detecting Hunts in Wildlife Video, 2011. |
| Haering, Maritime Surveillance in the Intracoastal Waterway Using Networked Underwater Acoustic Sensors Integrated with a Regional Command Center, 2011. |
| Haering, Proceedings, IEEE Workshop on Content-Based Access of Image and Video Libraries, 2011. |
| Haering, Rapidly Deployable Video Analysis Sensor Units for Wide Area Surveillance, 2011. |
| Haering, What Would You Pay for Automated Video Analysis?, 2011. |
| Hakeen et al., Semantic Video Search Using Natural Language Queries, 2011. |
| Heartwell, Automated Video Protection, Monitoring & Detection, 2011. |
| Ivex, VSA1200: Installation Guide, May 31, 2001, pp. 1-13. |
| Kanade et al., Advances in Multi-Sensor Video Cooperative Surveillance, 1998. |
| Kotlis, “Things to Check Before Executing Solo Program (Supervisor),” pp. 1-41. |
| Lee et al., Fast Forensic Video Event Retrieval Using Geospatial Computing, 2011. |
| Lipton, Keynote: Intelligent Video as a Force Multiplier for Crime Detection and Prevention, 2008. |
| Lipton et al., Video Segmentation Using Statistical Pixel Modeling, 2008. |
| Lipton et al., Video Surveillance System Employing Video Primitives, 2011. |
| Lipton et al., Video-Based Human Verification System and Method, 2008. |
| Venetianer, Performance Evaluation of an Intelligent Video Surveillance System—A Case Study, 2011, p. 1. |
| Venetianer, Video Surveillance: Computer Vision Object Recognition Shape Estimation, 2011, p. 1. |
| VideoIQ, VideoIQ View Video Management System, Jan. 1, 2004. |
| Yin et al., Surveillance Systems View Handling in Video Surveillance Systems, 2010. |
| Yin et al., Video Surveillance System with Omni-Directional Camera, 2011. |
| Yin et al., View Handling in Video Surveillance Systems, 2011. |
| Zhang et al., Multi-State Target Tracking, 2011. |
| Zhang et al., Wide-Area Site-Based Video Surveillance System, 2009. |
| Zhang, “A Flexible New Technique for Camera Calibration,” Technical Report MSR-TR-98-71, Microsoft Research, Microsoft Corp., Dec. 2, 1998. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20160275766 A1 | Sep 2016 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 14203065 | Mar 2014 | US |
| Child | 15044902 | US | |
| Parent | 11300581 | Dec 2005 | US |
| Child | 14203065 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 11057154 | Feb 2005 | US |
| Child | 11300581 | US | |
| Parent | 09987707 | Nov 2001 | US |
| Child | 11057154 | US | |
| Parent | 09694712 | Oct 2000 | US |
| Child | 09987707 | US |
