SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri ve Bilgisayar Bilimleri Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1

COMPARISON OF EIGEN FACES AND ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS IN FACE RECOGNITION

YÜZ TANIMA UYGULAMALARINDA ÖZYÜZLER VE YAPAY SİNİR AĞLARININ KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Hakan KEKÜL
Hüdaverdi BİRCAN
Halil ARSLAN
Pages
51–59
Publication Date
2018-06-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It has been determined that the two systems may be alternatives for different situations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, two basic methods of face recognition and comparison with the operation of the feature-based methods and modeled in face recognition systems two methods are intended to be designed so as to generate different alternatives.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The recognition performances in different situations and their performance against the difficulties of the face recognition problem have been evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It has been determined that the two systems may be alternatives for different situations.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yüz Tanıma · Özyüzler · Yapay Sinir Ağları

Abstract

In this study, two basic methods of face recognition and comparison with the operation of the feature-based methods and modeled in face recognition systems two methods are intended to be designed so as to generate different alternatives. For this purpose, eigenfaces for the view-based method and artificial neural Networks for the feature-based method are used. The systems were trained using different data bases for eigenfaces and artificial neural networks, and the results of the test data and Networks were compared. The recognition performances in different situations and their performance against the difficulties of the face recognition problem have been evaluated. It has been determined that the two systems may be alternatives for different situations.

Özet

Bu çalışma ile yüz tanımanın iki temel metodu olan görünüm ve öznitelik tabanlı yöntemlerin modellenerek karşılaştırılması ve iki metodun yüz tanıma sistemlerinde farklı alternatifler oluşturacak şekilde modellenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaçla görünüm tabanlı yöntem için özyüzler ve öznitelik tabanlı yöntem için ise yapay sinir ağları kullanılmıştır. Özyüzler ve yapay sinir ağları için farklı veri tabanları kullanılarak sistemler eğitilmiş ve test verileri ile yöntemlerin sonuçları karşılaştırılmıştır. Farklı durumlardaki tanıma performansları ve yüz tanıma probleminin zorlukları karşısındaki başarımları değerlendirilmiştir. İki sistemin farklı durumlar için birbirinin alternatifi olabileceği belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KEKÜL, H., BİRCAN, H., ARSLAN, H. (2018). COMPARISON OF EIGEN FACES AND ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORKS IN FACE RECOGNITION. Uluslararası Yönetim Bilişim Sistemleri ve Bilgisayar Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 2 - Sayı: 1, 51–59. https://ajindex.com/articles/416526

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Basheer, I. A., & Hajmeer, M. (2000). Artificial neural networks: fundamentals, computing, design, and application. Journal of microbiological methods, 43(1), 3-31.
  2. Benvenuto, F., & Marani, A. (2000). Neural networks for environmental problems: data quality control and air pollution nowcasting. Global NEST: The International Journal, 2(3), 281-292.
  3. Boznar, M., Lesjak, M., & Mlakar, P. (1993). A neural network-based method for short-term predictions of ambient SO2 concentrations in highly polluted industrial areas of complex terrain. Atmospheric Environment. Part B. Urban Atmosphere, 27(2), 221-230.
  4. Cheng, B., & Titterington, D. M. (1994). Neural networks: A review from a statistical perspective. Statistical science, 2-30.
  5. Comrie, A. C. (1997). Comparing neural networks and regression models for ozone forecasting. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 47(6), 653-663.
  6. Goldstein, A. J., Harmon, L. D., & Lesk, A. B. (1971). Identification of human faces. Proceedings of the IEEE, 59(5), 748-760.
  7. Gökmen, M., Kurt, B., Kahraman, F., & Çapar, A. (2007). Çok Amaçlı Gürbüz Yüz Tanıma. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi Bilgisayar Mühendisliği Bölümü, Tübitak Projesi, Proje, (104E121). Haig, N. D. (1985). How faces differ—A new comparative technique. Perception, 14(5), 601-615.
  8. Jain, A. K., & Kumar, A. (2010). Biometrics of Next Generation: An Overview. proceedings Second Generation Biometrics’ Springer. Kaufman, G. J., & Breeding, K. J. (1976). The automatic recognition of human faces from profile silhouettes. IEEE Transactions on systems, Man, and Cybernetics, (2), 113-121.
  9. Jain, A. K., & Li, S. Z. (2011). Handbook of face recognition. New York: Springer. Martinez, A. M. (1998). The AR face database. CVC technical report. New report predicts Global Biometrics Market to reach US$16.47 Billion, Erişim Tarihi: 20 Aralık 2011, http://www.planetbiometrics.com/article-details/i/917/.
  10. Pentland, A., Moghaddam, B., & Starner, T. (1994). View-based and modular eigenspaces for face recognition. In CVPR (Vol. 94, pp. 84-91).
  11. Pike, J. (2007). Homeland Security: Biometrics. GlobalSecurity.org. Rhodes, G. (2013). Looking at faces: First-order and second-order features as determinants of facial appearance. Perception, 42(11), 1179-1199.
  12. Sirovich, L., & Kirby, M. (1987). Low-dimensional procedure for the characterization of human faces. Josa a, 4(3), 519-524.
  13. Terzopoulos, D., & Waters, K. (1990). Analysis of facial images using physical and anatomical models. In Computer Vis