pith. sign in

arxiv: 1903.03303 · v1 · pith:PXME3IGEnew · submitted 2019-03-08 · 💻 cs.CV

Learning from Synthetic Data for Crowd Counting in the Wild

classification 💻 cs.CV
keywords datacrowdsyntheticcountingperformancerealwilddataset
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Recently, counting the number of people for crowd scenes is a hot topic because of its widespread applications (e.g. video surveillance, public security). It is a difficult task in the wild: changeable environment, large-range number of people cause the current methods can not work well. In addition, due to the scarce data, many methods suffer from over-fitting to a different extent. To remedy the above two problems, firstly, we develop a data collector and labeler, which can generate the synthetic crowd scenes and simultaneously annotate them without any manpower. Based on it, we build a large-scale, diverse synthetic dataset. Secondly, we propose two schemes that exploit the synthetic data to boost the performance of crowd counting in the wild: 1) pretrain a crowd counter on the synthetic data, then finetune it using the real data, which significantly prompts the model's performance on real data; 2) propose a crowd counting method via domain adaptation, which can free humans from heavy data annotations. Extensive experiments show that the first method achieves the state-of-the-art performance on four real datasets, and the second outperforms our baselines. The dataset and source code are available at https://gjy3035.github.io/GCC-CL/.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Learning to count small and clustered objects with application to bacterial colonies

    cs.CV 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    ACFamNet Pro reaches 9.64% mean normalized absolute error on bacterial colony images under 5-fold cross-validation, beating FamNet by 12.71%.