PRE2016 4 Groep3: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| Michalina Tataj | | Michalina Tataj | ||
|} | |} | ||
= Introduction = | = Introduction = | ||
Line 95: | Line 97: | ||
==== primary users ==== | ==== primary users ==== | ||
[who] | |||
==== secondary users ==== | ==== secondary users ==== | ||
[who] | |||
==== user friendliness ==== | |||
==== sense of participation ==== | |||
==== public survey ==== | |||
== Society == | == Society == | ||
=== advantages === | |||
==== terrorist/criminal activity ==== | |||
==== security ==== | |||
==== racial/religious tensions ==== | |||
=== disadvantages === | |||
==== privacy concerns ==== | |||
== Enterprise == | == Enterprise == | ||
==== feasibility ==== | |||
==== advantages ==== | |||
==== disadvantages ==== | |||
= references = | = references = |
Revision as of 13:58, 29 April 2017
Group members
Student ID | Name |
0900940 | Ryan van Mastrigt |
0891024 | René Verhoef |
??? | Lisselotte van Wissen |
??? | Sjanne Zeijlemaker |
??? | Michalina Tataj |
Introduction
problem description
definitions
- abnormal behaviour
- [explanation]
- Biometrics
- [explanation]
Objectives (/ TO DO list)
Goal: Develop a model for a video-based abnormal behaviour detection program
Objectives of this project:
- Formulate concrete problem statement
- Develop overview of the State-of-the-Art
- List of possible biometrics for detecting abnormal/suspicious behaviour
- List of different methods available for measuring biometrics (pros/cons, what method works best for what purpose/setting)
- Current areas of research
- Problems with current technologies
- Develop model scenarios for determining abnormal behavior
- Determine what constitutes abnormal behavior (heavily dependent on context)
- Determine what scenarios should be looked at (airports, sports stadia, banks)
- What techniques could be used (pros/cons, possible new ideas)
- Develop USE aspects
- Users:
- Develop easy-to-understand graphical interface for primary users
- Maintain sense of participation in primary users
- Conduct survey among general public to research support of such an application and to probe stance on privacy vs security
- Incorporate findings into design
- Society:
- Look into societal advantages (decreased criminal/terrorist activity, global sense of security, decrease in racial/religious tensions)
- Look into societal disadvantages (decrease in (perceived) privacy)
- Incorporate findings into design
- Enterprise:
- Make sure model is economically feasible and can compete with current systems
- Look into advantages/disadvantages for enterprises
- Incorporate findings into design
- Users:
- Finalize actual model design
- Create final presentation
The main goal of the model is to provide a general structure of a program which is capable of identifying suspicious persons in a crowd for security applications. The method should be based on biometrics which can be used to determine abnormal behavior in order to obtain a higher success rate than comparable human-based surveillance.
The objectives of the model are:
- Technical objectives:
- Decrease false-negative rate compared to human-based surveillance
- Decrease false-positive rate compared to human-based surveillance
- Provide results to primary user(s) (security guards/police)
- USE objectives:
- Users:
- Provide easy-to-understand information to primary user
- Provide a higher sense of security (secondary user)
- Society:
- Decrease terrorist activity
- Higher global sense of security
- Higher crime prevention
- Decrease racial/religious tensions
- Enterprise:
- Create a system which is better than current systems, in order to sell to users
- Be economically feasible
- Decrease damage caused to assets (such as buildings) and maintain company reputation
- Users:
state-of-the-art
approach
planning
[input Gantt chart]
milestones
USE aspects
User
primary users
[who]
secondary users
[who]