| Literature DB >> 35528215 |
Abstract
Security threats are always there if the human intruders are not identified and recognized well in time in highly security-sensitive environments like the military, airports, parliament houses, and banks. Fog computing and machine learning algorithms on Gait sequences can prove to be better for restricting intruders promptly. Gait recognition provides the ability to observe an individual unobtrusively, without any direct cooperation or interaction from the people, making it very attractive than other biometric recognition techniques. In this paper, a Fog Computing and Machine Learning Inspired Human Identity and Gender Recognition using Gait Sequences (FCML-Gait) are proposed. Internet of things (IoT) devices and video capturing sensors are used to acquire data. Frames are clustered using the affinity propagation (AP) clustering technique into several clusters, and cluster-based averaged gait image(C-AGI) feature is determined for each cluster. For training and testing of datasets, sparse reconstruction-based metric learning (SRML) and Speeded Up Robust Features (SURF) with support vector machine (SVM) are applied on benchmark gait database ADSC-AWD having 80 subjects of 20 different individuals in the Fog Layer to improve the processing. The performance metrics, for instance, accuracy, precision, recall, F-measure, C-time, and R-time have been measured, and a comparative evaluation of the projected method with the existing SRML technique has been provided in which the proposed FCML-Gait outperforms and attains the highest accuracy of 95.49%.Entities:
Keywords: Cloud computing; Fog computing; Gait; Gender recognition; Human identity; SRML; SURF; SVM
Year: 2022 PMID: 35528215 PMCID: PMC9067894 DOI: 10.1007/s11760-022-02217-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Signal Image Video Process ISSN: 1863-1703 Impact factor: 1.583
Fig. 1Three-layer structure of the proposed framework
Fig. 2Sample images from ADSC-AWD dataset
Fig. 3The layered architecture of the projected method
Fig. 4Flow chart of the proposed system in Fog layer
Fig. 5Proposed GUI for simulation
Fig. 6a The cluster of frames, b C-AGI of clustered frames
Fig. 7Detected strokes in video
Fig. 8key points of video frames
Fig. 9Performance metrics
Performance parameters of the proposed framework
| No. of iterations | Accuracy | Precision | Recall | F-measure | R-Time | C-Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 96.48 | 0.995 | 0.012 | 0.01194 | 0.081 | 275.85 |
| 2 | 98.36 | 0.983 | 0.034 | 0.0334 | 0.057 | 274.73 |
| 3 | 94.65 | 0.995 | 0.064 | 0.0637 | 0.079 | 304.74 |
| 4 | 91.86 | 0.928 | 0.016 | 0.0148 | 0.087 | 294.27 |
| 5 | 88.93 | 0.974 | 0.013 | 0.01267 | 0.095 | 467.34 |
| 6 | 95.86 | 0.947 | 0.034 | 0.0323 | 0.071 | 324.98 |
| 7 | 97.95 | 0.997 | 0.032 | 0.0319 | 0.094 | 292.85 |
| 8 | 97.57 | 0.929 | 0.015 | 0.01394 | 0.085 | 374.87 |
| 9 | 98.47 | 0.988 | 0.012 | 0.01186 | 0.089 | 284.65 |
| 10 | 94.86 | 0.974 | 0.015 | 0.0147 | 0.096 | 356.43 |
*R-Time is recognition, and C-Time is computational time
Comparison of accuracy: training (dataset size: 75%)
| No. of iterations | Previous (SRML) | Proposed FCML-Gait |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 88 | 96.48 |
| 2 | 91.5 | 98.36 |
| 3 | 93 | 94.65 |
| 4 | 93.4 | 91.86 |
| 5 | 93.6 | 88.93 |
| 6 | 93.6 | 95.86 |
| 7 | 93.6 | 97.95 |
| 8 | 93.6 | 97.57 |
| 9 | 93.6 | 98.47 |
| 10 | 93.6 | 94.86 |
Comparison of average accuracy (dataset size: 75%)
| Average accuracy (%) | |
|---|---|
| FCML-GAIT | 95.49 |
| Previous (SRML) | 92.75 |
Comparison of accuracy (dataset size: 50%)
| No. of iterations | Previous (SRML) | ProposedFCML-Gait |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 87.51 | 95.74 |
| 2 | 87.88 | 97.48 |
| 3 | 88.12 | 93.85 |
| 4 | 89.25 | 91.57 |
| 5 | 89.25 | 90.53 |
| 6 | 89.25 | 89.86 |
| 7 | 89.50 | 86.95 |
| 8 | 89.25 | 94.51 |
| 9 | 89.25 | 96.76 |
| 10 | 89.25 | 93.54 |
Comparison of average accuracy (dataset size: 50%)
| Average Accuracy (%) | |
|---|---|
| FCML-Gait | 93.07 |
| Previous (SRML) | 88.85 |
Comparison of accuracy (dataset size: 25%)
| No. of Iterations | Previous (SRML) | Proposed FCML-Gait |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 86.51 | 92.84 |
| 2 | 87.00 | 95.83 |
| 3 | 88.12 | 87.94 |
| 4 | 88.25 | 93.48 |
| 5 | 88.25 | 94.35 |
| 6 | 88.25 | 91.54 |
| 7 | 88.50 | 92.44 |
| 8 | 88.25 | 91.67 |
| 9 | 88.25 | 93.34 |
| 10 | 88.25 | 94.86 |
Comparison of average accuracy (dataset size: 25%)
| Average Accuracy (%) | |
|---|---|
| Proposed FCML-Gait | 92.82 |
| Previous (SRML) | 87.96 |
Comparison of recognition and computational time
| Methods | Computational Time(S) | Recognition Time (S) |
|---|---|---|
| NCA | 15.32 | 2.54 |
| LMNN | 200.46 | 2.54 |
| ITML | 88.65 | 2.54 |
| SRML | 4502.65 | 2.54 |
| Proposed FCML-Gait | 325.071 | 0.0834 |
Fig. 10Comparison of R-time with previous methods
Comparative analysis of proposed work with related studies
| Authors | Dataset | Algorithm/techniques | IoT | FC | CC | Accuracy/RR (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sruti Das Choudhury et al. [ | OU-ISIR-B is used | An averaged gait key-phase image (AGKI) | No | No | No | 86.46 |
| Jiwen Lu et al. [ | ADSC-AWD | SRML | No | No | No | 92.7 |
| Xiaohui Zhao et al. [ | CASIA-B | ACM technique | No | No | No | 92 |
| Cheng Fengjiang et al. [ | CASIA-B | Deterministic machine learning technique | No | No | No | 91.3 |
| M. H. Khan et al. [ | CASIA-B | Spatiotemporal characteristics of human motion and Linear SVM | No | No | No | 94.5 |
| Daigo Muramatsu et al. [ | A subset of OU-ISIR referred to as OULP is used | VTM-based approach, TCMs, and Fusion using linear logistic regression (LLR) | No | No | No | 91 |
| Xin Chen et al. [ | multi-gait dataset of 120 persons | Support Vector Machine | No | No | No | 91.53 |
| M. N. Hidalgo et al. [ | Their generated dataset | K-NN | No | No | Yes | 95 |
| Hu Ng et al. [ | SOTON covariate | Support Vector Machine | No | No | No | 83.21 |
| S. Batool et al. [ | 1 cycle of 30 samples using Accelerometer | Random Forest Classifier | Yes | No | Yes | 94 |
| Proposed framework (FCML-Gait) | ADSC-AWD and IoT devices for real-time dataset | Fog Computing and Machine Learning (SURF, SRML, and SVM) | Yes | Yes | Yes | 95.49 |