Demo Data from SIGIR 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Rebecca Book
dblp:27/5343
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Face, body and person analysis · 84% 3D vision · 16% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis
face recognition |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | Automatic Face Recognition from Skeletal Remains · CVPR 2007 |
Computer vision › 3D vision
3d face reconstruction |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | Automatic Face Recognition from Skeletal Remains · CVPR 2007 |
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis › face alignment
active shape model |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | Automatic Face Recognition from Skeletal Remains · CVPR 2007 |
Computer vision › Face, body and person analysis
face alignment |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | Automatic Face Recognition from Skeletal Remains · CVPR 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
constrained optimization · 0.1boosting · 0.1CT scan database · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | Automatic Face Recognition from Skeletal RemainsabstractThe ability to determine the identity of a skull found at a crime scene is of critical importance to the law enforcement community. Traditional clay-based methods attempt to reconstruct the face so as to enable identification of the deceased by members of the general public. However, these reconstructions lack consistency from practitioner to practitioner and it has been shown that the human recognition of these reconstructions against a photo gallery of potential victims is little better than chance. In this paper we propose the automation of the reconstruction process. For a given skull, a data-driven 3D generative model of the face is constructed using a database of CT head scans. The reconstruction can be constrained based on prior knowledge such as age and or weight. To determine whether or not these reconstructions have merit, geometric methods for comparing reconstructions against a gallery of facial images are proposed. First, active shape models are used to automatically detect a set of facial landmarks on each image. These landmarks are associated with 3D points on the reconstruction. Direct comparison of the reconstruction is problematic since in general the camera geometry used for image capture is unknown and there are uncertainties associated with the reconstruction and landmark detection processes. The first method of comparison uses constrained optimization to determine the optimal projection of the reconstruction on to the image. Residuals are then analyzed resulting in a ranking of the gallery. The second method uses boosting to learn which points are both reliable and discriminating. This results in a match/no-match classifier. Experimental evidence indicating that skull recognition from facial images can be achieved is presented. Peter H. Tu, Rebecca Book, Xiaoming Liu 0002, Nils Krahnstoever, Carl Adrian, Phil Williams |
CVPR | 2 |