Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36305942›Full record

ArticleBiological cybernetics2022

Exploration of motion inhibition for the suppression of false positives in biologically inspired small target detection algorithms from a moving platform.

Aaron Melville-Smith, Anthony Finn, Muhammad Uzair, Russell S A Brinkworth

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biological cybernetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 50% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Aaron Melville-SmithDefense and Systems Institute, UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5095, Australia. aaron.melville-smith@unisa.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-0579-161X
Anthony FinnDefense and Systems Institute, UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5095, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2690-0838
Muhammad UzairDefense and Systems Institute, UniSA STEM, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, 5095, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5964-4351
Russell S A BrinkworthCollege of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Tonsley, SA, 5042, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0270-3538
University of South Australia · AUFlinders University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detecting small moving targets against a cluttered background in visual data is a challenging task. The main problems include spatio-temporal target contrast enhancement, background suppression and accurate target segmentation. When targets are at great distances from a non-stationary camera, the difficulty of these challenges increases. In such cases the moving camera can introduce large spatial changes between frames which may cause issues in temporal algorithms; furthermore targets can approach a single pixel, thereby affecting spatial methods. Previous literature has shown that biologically inspired methods, based on the vision systems of insects, are robust to such conditions. It has also been shown that the use of divisive optic-flow inhibition with these methods enhances the detectability of small targets. However, the location within the visual pathway the inhibition should be applied was ambiguous. In this paper, we investigated the tunings of some of the optic-flow filters and use of a nonlinear transform on the optic-flow signal to modify motion responses for the purpose of suppressing false positives and enhancing small target detection. Additionally, we looked at multiple locations within the biologically inspired vision (BIV) algorithm where inhibition could further enhance detection performance, and look at driving the nonlinear transform with a global motion estimate. To get a better understanding of how the BIV algorithm performs, we compared to other state-of-the-art target detection algorithms, and look at how their performance can be enhanced with the optic-flow inhibition. Our explicit use of the nonlinear inhibition allows for the incorporation of a wider dynamic range of inhibiting signals, along with spatio-temporal filter refinement, which further increases target-background discrimination in the presence of camera motion. Extensive experiments shows that our proposed approach achieves an improvement of 25% over linearly conditioned inhibition schemes and 2.33 times the detection performance of the BIV model without inhibition. Moreover, our approach achieves between 10 and 104 times better detection performance compared to any conventional state-of-the-art moving object detection algorithm applied to the same, highly cluttered and moving scenes. Applying the nonlinear inhibition to other algorithms showed that their performance can be increased by up to 22 times. These findings show that the application of optic-flow- based signal suppression should be applied to enhance target detection from moving platforms. Furthermore, they indicate where best to look for evidence of such signals within the insect brain.

Indexed as

Motion PerceptionOptic FlowAlgorithmsAnimalsInsectaMotionVision, OcularBiological visionOptic flowSaliency enhancementTarget detection

Identifiers

PMID36305942
PMCPMC9691501
OpenAlexW4307493358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.