English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Face recognition performance has improved remarkably in the last decade. Much of this success can be attributed to the development of deep learning techniques such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs). While CNNs have pushed the state-of-the-art forward, their training process requires a large amount of clean and correctly labelled training data. If a CNN is intended to tolerate facial pose, then we face an important question: should this training data be diverse in its pose distribution, or should face images be normalized to a single pose in a pre-processing step? To address this question, we evaluate a number of facial landmarking algorithms and a popular frontalization method to understand their effect on facial recognition performance. Additionally, we introduce a new, automatic, single-image frontalization scheme that exceeds the performance of the reference frontalization algorithm for video-to-video face matching on the Point and Shoot Challenge (PaSC) dataset. Additionally, we investigate failure modes of each frontalization method on different facial yaw using the CMU Multi-PIE dataset. We assert that the subsequent recognition and verification performance serves to quantify the effectiveness of each pose correction scheme.

To Frontalize or Not to Frontalize: Do We Really Need Elaborate Pre-processing to Improve Face Recognition?