Two Parallel Deep Convolutional Neural Networks

for Pedestrian Detection

Bo-Yao Lin

Chu-Song Chen

Institute of Information Science

Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
Email: boyaolin@iis.sinica.edu.tw

Institute of Information Science &

Research Center for Information Technology Innovation
Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
Email: song@iis.sinica.edu.tw

AbstractPedestrian detection attracts lots of attentions in

the field of computer vision in recent years. It is difficult to
handle data imbalance between positive and negative examples
and easy-to-confused negative samples for pedestrian detection
when training a single deep convolutional neural network (CNN)
model. In this paper, we present a deep learning approach that
combines two parallel deep CNN models for pedestrian detection.
We propose using two deep CNNs, and each of which is capable
of solving a particular mission-oriented task to form parallel
classification models. Then, the models are integrated to build
a more robust pedestrian detector. Experimental results on the
Caltech dataset demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach
for pedestrian detection compared to other state-of-the-art deep
CNN methods.

I. I NTRODUCTION
Pedestrian detection based on images is an active research
area and become more and more popular within the last
decade. A robust pedestrian detector is a key component applicable to the fields such as automotive safety [1], robotics [2],
and visual surveillance [3]. Pedestrian detection problem is
regarded as a canonical object detection task, where differentiating human bodies from backgrounds is its main goal.
Detecting humans in various scenes is challenging on the
grounds that humans may have various postures with partial
occlusions. Furthermore, shapes of several human-like objects
(such as postboxes and traffic lights) on the street may also
be confused with the human bodies due to large ambiguities
between these two types of objects, making the problem even
challenging.
Deep convolutional neural networks (CNN) have received
considerable attentions in recent years, and have shown their
effectiveness for objection recognition recently. Deep CNNs
have the ability to learn discriminative feature representations
from raw RGB pixels in an end-to-end manner, and they unify
the feature-extraction and classification in a single learning
model. Deep CNNs have been widely used in image classification [4] [5], object detection and localization [6] [7],
and segmentation [8]. Several deep architectures have been
proposed for general object recognition tasks, eg., AlexNet [5],
GoogLeNet [9], and VGG [10]. GoogLeNet has a great
success on both the image-classification and object-detection

tasks in the recent ILSVRC2014, where there are 1.2 million

images of 1000 classes [4],
Due to the promising results of general deep CNN models,
a beneficial method for training deep CNN is to adopt the
parameters learned from the general image classification problem, which are pre-trained on Imagenet, as the initial weights.
Then, it fine-tunes the weights for the transfer-learning purpose to solve the problems in other related domains. Such
a parameter-transfer-learning scheme has achieved advantageous effects in several object detection tasks, such as RCNN [6]. Hence, in this paper, we follow this transfer-learning
principle and pre-train on Imagenet to learn a pedestrian
detector. In [11], it provides a fine view of architectures and
parameters to implement pedestrian detection on deep CNN
models through a wide range of experiments. However, based
on our observation, direct parameter-transferring or fine-tuning
usually cannot solve the problem well due to the discrepancy
between the pedestrian detection and classification problem.
First, pedestrian detection is a 2 classes problem including
pedestrian and background, where the background class is an
universal concept consisting of unlimited kinds of objects or
scenes. It is hard to reflect the variations of the backgrounds
from a general image classification model that learns from
specific 1000 object classes. Furthermore, the imbalanced
problem resulting from the background training data (that are
far more than the pedestrian training data) also make the finetuned network ineffective.
To address this problem, we use GoogLeNet in a different
organization in this paper. An advantageous characteristic of
GoogLeNet is that it is a flexible deep learning architecture
consisting of the early layers (for learning early representations), middle layers (for deep feature extraction), and final layers (for integration and classification). In particular,
inception is a repetitive and re-useable structure, which is
employed to construct the middle layers, where the number of
inceptions can be alternated to fit different task goals. In this
work, we suggest to use a GoogLeNet with fewer inceptions,
which can largely reduce the parameters which need to be
learned through the training stage and show that it is more
effective for pedestrian detection. Besides, due to above observation, we found that a single deep CNN model learned from

c
978-1-5090-0357-0/15/$31.00 2015
IEEE

GoogLeNet

Inception
Sigmoid
CrossEntropy
Loss

Conv 1x1

Image

DepthConcat
Conv 1x1
Conv 3x3

224

224

Conv 7x7
Conv 3x3
Conv 1x1
MaxPool 3x3
MaxPool 3x3

(a) Early Layers

Conv 1x1
Conv 5x5

AveragePool
5x5
Conv 1x1

MaxPool
3x3
Conv 1x1

(b) Middle Layers

FC
1024

FC
1

(c) Final Layers

Fig. 1. The structure of GoogLeNet

the imbalance training data is hard to differentiate the critical

negative examples from the positive example of pedestrians.
To overcome this difficulty, we introduce another deep CNN
with different missions assigned and propose to combine these
deep CNNs, and then mix the final-layer classification results
of these models to form a pedestrian detector. We call the
approach Two Parallel Deep Convolutional Neural Networks
(TPDCNN). Finally, we validate its performance on Caltech
dataset [12], which is a representative benchmark publicly
available for pedestrian detection.
II. R ELATED W ORK
In this section, we review several methods designed for
pedestrian detection. Existing methods for pedestrian detection
can be divided into two categories: handcrafted-features and
deep-learning approaches. We review these methods from
these two distinct directions. Handcrafted features, eg., Haarlike features [13], SIFT [14], HOG [15], HOG-LBP [16], have
been widely employed for pedestrian detection. To handle
more complex articulations of human parts, several deformation models [17] [18] [19] are introduced. These deformable
part models (DPM) learn a mixture of local templates for
the body parts. Classifiers such as SVM [15], boosting classifiers [20], random forests [21] are then used to determine
whether a pedestrian is detected. Integral channel features [20]
have become a popular method to extract efficient features for
pedestrian detection. Dollar et al. propose Aggregated Channel
Features (ACF) [22] that comprise gradient histogram, gradients, and LUV. Then, they learn the classifiers in a boosting
manner. Ke [23] et al. use convolutional network architecture
with orthogonal PCA filters to improve ACF. Zhang et al.
propose Checkerboards [24] that use filtered channel features
with HOG+LUV as low-level features. They find that the

number of filters appears to be the most important variable,

and checkerboard-like patterns or purely random filters can
achieve good performance. They also add optical-flow features
to further enhance the performance.
Deep-learning methods perform end-to-end learning to
tackle the pedestrian detection problem. In ConvNet [25], the
authors use CNN to handle the limited training data on INRIA
dataset. They also test the performance on Caltech pedestrian
dataset while training on INRIA. DBN-Isol [26] uses a stack of
Restricted Boltzmann Machines (RBMS) to extend deformable
parts models (DPMs). They design overlapping parts at multiple layers and then, verify the visibility of a part for multiple
times at distinct layers. DBN-Mut [27] extends the DBN-Isol
to account for person-to-person relations. JointDeep [28] is
proposed to use deep networks to jointly learn the feature
extraction, deformation handling, occlusion handling, and classification. Zeng et al. [29] adopt deep model that can jointly
train multi-stage classifiers through several stages of backpropagation and use contextual features computed at different
scales. SDN [30] uses switchable layers to jointly learn low
level features and high level parts. Hosang et al. [11] employ
CifarNet and R-CNN with AlexNet for pedestrian detection.
They also discuss the performance impact of pedestrian detection on different architectures and parameters. Tian et al.
introduce TA-CNN [31] where further pedestrian attributes
(e.g. carrying backpack) and scene attributes (e.g. vehicle
and tree) are introduced to solve the confusions between
the positive and hard negative samples. LFOV [32] proposes
a Large-Field-of-View deep network to make classification
decisions simultaneously and accurately at multiple locations.
Angelova et al. [33] propose to cascade deep nets and fast
features to speed up the detection process while maintaining
good detection performance.

TPDCNN

224

Image

Upper Row

Average
Fusion

ACF Proposals

224

Early Layers

480

Middle Layers

Final Layers

640

Lower Row

Fig. 2. The overall architecture of Two Parallel Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (TPDCNN)

III. M ETHOD
In this section, we would illustrate our concept and details
of the proposed TPDCNN. Before introducing our method, a
brief review of GoogLeNet is given in advance. First, an image
fed into the network goes through the early layers shown
in Figure 1(a). In early layers, Some early representations
are formed through a sequence of 7 7, 1 1, and 3 3
convolutions and max pooling operators. Then, middle layers
which is formed by a repetitive structure called inception is
concatenated with the early layers. An inception has several
parallel 1 1, 3 3, and 5 5 convolutions and max pooling
summarized with a depth concatenation stage, as shown in
Figure 1(b). A depth concatenation is then performed and the
output is sent to the next inception. The inception serves as a
basic unit module to extract deep-representation features, and
9 inceptions are used in GoogLeNet. The final layers (shown
in Figure 1(c)) integrate the deep features extracted by average
pooling and a fully-connected layer, and then linear classifiers
are constructed for the classification. The scale of learning
parameters, i.e. weight, in neural networks is a pivotal factor.
It may degrade the performance of networks if the number of
learning parameters is too larger with limited training data.
Compared to the AlexNet model having almost 60 Mega
parameters, GoogLeNet reduced the learned parameters to
approximately 5 Mega with a more deeper network.
In the original GoogLeNet, it uses softmax to classify
1000 categories on ImageNet. For pedestrian detection, it
only needs two classes, pedestrian and background, which
is a binary classification problem. In our work, we replace
the softmax layer with a sigmoid cross-entropy loss in the
final linear classifier layer. Nevertheless, using the whole

GoogLeNet for pedestrian detection often suffers from severe

over-fitting problem, even though the networks are fine-tuned
from a diverse and large-scale dataset, ImageNet. The result
of utilizing GoogLeNet to train a pedestrian detector is shown
in Section IV. In the following, we introduce a concise model
to tackle this problem in Section III-A. Then, the joint models
are depicted in Section III-B.

A. Concise model for pedestrian detection

The original GoogLeNet is a mighty model that can differentiate various objects. However, the features learned in the
final layers of the GoogLeNet would be too restrictive to be
fine-tuned to a pedestrian detector. Nevertheless, it would have
a better generalization ability of the features learned in some
previous layers (based on the ImageNet) as they are not that
restrictive to the particular object classes.
This inspired us to use a concise model for handling the
pedestrian detection problem. In our architecture, the model
is reduced to a concise network with fewer inceptions in the
middle layer (where 2 inceptions are used here). We retained
the early layers and final layers in our concise model. This
makes the training process easier and faster because the overall
parameters are reduced. Besides, we still make use of pretraining and initialize the weights of the early and middle
layers with that learned from the ImageNet. The concise
model is illustrated in the upper row of Fig. 2. Compared
to GoogLeNet that achieves the log-average miss-rate (MR)
of 36.66%, our concise model can considerately reduce the
MR to 27.31% on Caltech test set.

B. Two Parallel Deep Convolutional Neural Networks

Inter-class correlation, where some background regions are
similar to the pedestrians, is a main issue for pedestrian
detection. Region proposals consisting of a large portion of
background area and a small portion of pedestrian area are also
critical negative samples resulting in the inter-class correlation
problem, and this may incur localization error. The concise
model introduced in Section III-A still suffers from the critical
negative background samples that have large ambiguity and are
easy to be confused with the foreground pedestrians.
We adopt a mission-oriented strategy for training the networks to deal with this difficulty. The networks trained with
different goals are combined to form the TPDCNN architecture. Currently, TPDCNN has two rows (with each row
a separated model) as shown in Fig. 2. Without loss of
generality, it can be added with more rows for different
tasks if necessary. The mission of the first deep model is
to discriminate the pedestrian samples with general and easy
negative background samples, while the mission of the other
model is to discriminate them with critical negative examples
only. We illustrate their details as follows.
Upper row of TPDCNN: The upper row of TPDCNN consists
of the early layers, middle layers of 2 inceptions, and final
layers, as depicted in Section III-A. To train this model, we use
all of the available positive (pedestrian) samples and negative
(background) samples. The ground-truth windows provided
by the dataset are employed as positive samples. In [11], it
shows that adding some jitters, that is a positive proposal of
large overlapping area with ground truth, may degrade the
detection performance. Instead, we employ horizontal mirror
to augment these positive samples. To collect the negative
samples, we follow the conventions in relevant studies such
as [31] that an object-proposal method is used to produce
multiple candidate windows at first. Then, the windows whose
overlapping degrees with the ground truths are less than a
threshold (here, 0.3) are chosen to be the negative samples.
Both positive and negative samples are normalized into the size
of 224224 and fed into the deep CNNs. The object-proposal
method and procedure of normalization on input images used
in this work will be introduced in Section III-C.
Lower row of TPDCNN: We bestow a different mission
on the lower row of TPDCNN. The lower row of TPDCNN
focuses on a more difficult goal where harder negative samples
can be separated with the positive ones in the learned feature
space (but the easier negative samples could be sacrificed).
As the mission assigned is more difficult, we increase one
additional inception and adopt a more complex network with
three inceptions in the middle layer, as shown in the lower
part of Fig. 2. Due to the relatively scarce amount of positive
samples, the positive samples used for training this row remain
the same as that used in the upper row, but the negative
samples are chosen as the ones fail to be classified correctly by
the first row. Hence, the mission of the lower row is disparate
to that the first row and they are trained independently.
There are several advantages of the TPDCNN model, and

we are discussed as follows. For building a pedestrian detector,

hard negative human-like background regions are always a
main issue. Increasing the number of hard negative samples
in the training stage by changing the overlapping degree
threshold may improve the performance but also causes a large
imbalance between the positive and negative samples. The
proposed TPDCNN can handle the data imbalance problem
more properly and thus get better performance. Furthermore,
if the two models are dependent or coherent, combining them
becomes less meaningful. The lower network has a stronger
ability to differentiate such ambiguity (although would suffer
from worse performance on distinguishing general negative
and positive samples) because only the negative data that are
ambiguous to the upper row are used in training the lower
network. These two rows are thus incoherent and mutually
beneficial to each other. Finally, the final score is generated
by averaging the final layers of these two parallel networks.
C. Preprocessing and postprocessing
We illustrate the implementation details of prep- and postprocessing steps to complete the pedestrian detection task.
1) Preprocessing: To detect all of the pedestrians in an
image, a possible way is to use a sliding window to test
numerous potential regions within an image. However, it is exhaustive and slow because of a large amount of computations
of convolution operations in deep CNN models. Many recent
studies generate the object proposals (candidate regions) to
avoid the exhaustive search. SelectiveSearch [34] is the most
popular proposal method and widely used in object detection.
Using class-specific proposals allows to reduce the number
of proposals by large magnitude. In this work, we follow the
approach of [31] that uses the ACF detector [22] to generate
the object proposal (via a loose threshold) for pedestrian detection. The model windows we choose for pedestrian detectors
is 128x64 pixels in which pedestrians have height 100 and
width 41. The height of the region proposal extracted by ACF
is normalized to 224 and the aspect ratio is preserved. As the
input to the network is 224 224, the empty parts occurred in
the aspect-ratio resizing are compensated with the mean color
used in the GoogLeNet training.
2) Postprocessing: According to the observation on the
work of objection detection [6], deep neural networks are not
reliable enough on localizing objects. To increase the precision
of the detected region, we also adopt the bounding-box (BBox)
regression method suggested in RCNN [6] and train a ridgeregression model that predicts a new detection bounding box
based on the feature extracted in the convolution layer outputs.
To avoid multiple responses in an adjacent local area, we run a
greedy Non-Maximum Suppression (NMS) procedure [35] to
suppress the large overlapping areas of detections with lower
scores.
Finally, we concatenate the preprocessing (object proposal),
TPDCNN, and postprocessing (BBox regression + NMS) steps
to form the entire approach. To implement TPDCNN, we
modify the GoogLeNet implementation [36] on the Caffe [37]
platform.

Networks
Upper row
Lower row

# of inceptions
2
3
2
3
TABLE I

Test MR
27.31%
29.52%
29.84%
25.38%

Networks
ConvNet [25]
DBN-Isol [26]
DBN-Mut [27]
MultiSDP [29]
JointDeep [28]
SDN [30]
LFOV [32]
DeepCascade [33]
DeepCascade+ [33]
R-CNN (AlexNet) [11]
TA-CNN [31]
TPDCNN
TABLE III

T HE SELECTION OF CONCISE MODELS FROM G OOG L E N ET

Networks
ACF [22]
GoogLeNet [9]
Upper row
Lower row
TPDCNN

BBox Regression
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
TABLE II

Test MR
29.76%
36.66%
27.31%
24.55%
25.38%
24.73%
21.25%
19.57%

Test MR
77.20%
53.14%
48.22%
45.39%
39.32%
37.87%
35.85%
31.11%
26.21%
23.30%
20.86%
19.57%

C OMPARISON TO OTHER DEEP LEARNING METHODS ON C ALTECH

DATASET ( RESONABLE )

D ETECTION QUALITY ON DIFFERENT DEEP ARCHITECTURES , WHERE Y

MEANS EMPLOYING BOUNDING BOX REGRESSION AND NMS AFTER CNN
STAGE , AND N MEANS NOT EMPLOYING THEM

1
.80
.64
.50

IV. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS

.40

A. Dataset

.30

miss rate

The Caltech dataset [12] is a well-designed pedestrian

detection benchmark, and its associated benchmark provides
an elaborate tool to evaluate the ability of pedestrian detections. This dataset consists of several video clips, which are
obtained from a car traversing U.S. streets under good weather
condition, and it contains lots of suburban and city scenes.
The Reasonable setting of the training set contains 4250
frames with roughly 2 103 annotated pedestrians in these
sampling frames. Here, we follow the same settings with [11],
and sample one out of three frames from the training video
clips. There are a total of 2 104 positive training samples
extracted from 42782 frames, and about 1.25 105 negative
samples which is mined by the ACF proposal, respectively.

.20

.10

.05

77.20% ConvNet
53.14% DBNIsol
48.22% DBNMut
45.39% MultiSDP
39.32% JointDeep
37.87% SDN
35.85% LFOV
31.11% DeepCascade
26.21% DeepCascade+
23.32% AlexNet+ImageNet
20.86% TACNN
19.57% TPDCNN
3

10

10

10

10

10

false positives per image

Fig. 3. Overall Performance on Caltech-Test compared with deep models

B. Evaluations of TPDCNN
In this section, we display the performance of our proposed
TPDCNN and the comparison to other deep learning methods
for pedestrian detection. We start to show the selection of
concise models from GoogLeNet, which are used to form two
parallel deep CNNs . Table I shows the performance with
a different number of inceptions for upper row and lower
row individually. We can see that the MR is closer on upper
row when the number of inceptions in middle layers is 2
or 3. However, as the lower row is assigned to deal with
more hard negative samples, the more inceptions (here, 3) is
advantageous to extract better features for discrimination.
Then, we show the detection quality on different deep
architectures and our proposed TPDCNN in Table II. We can
see that the original GoogLeNet structure is not promising
in pedestrian detection compared to other structures (even
when fine-tuning is performed), and it is even worse than the
proposal ACF. It shows that the original deeper GoogLeNet
is not a proper architecture for pedestrian detection. Our
upper-row model achieves a more favorable performance than

GoogLeNet. The lower-row model (trained on the positive and

critical negative samples only) can achieve comparable performance of the upper-row model. Both models perform better
when bounding-box regression is used. By using TPDCNN,
the joint scheme boosts the performance compared with the
above deep models. Similarly, introducing the bounding-box
regression on TPDCNN can also achieve a more favorable
result.
In the final part, we compare our approach, TPDCNN, with
other pedestrian detection approaches using deep learning.
These deep learning methods include ConvNet [25], DBNIsol [26], DBN-Mut [27], MultiSDP [29], JointDeep [28],
SDN [30], LFOV [32], DeepCascade, DeepCascade+ [33], RCNN (AlexNet) [11], and TA-CNN [31]. Table III shows the
results. Our TPDCNN achieves 19.57% with the bounding
box regression, which performs more favorable than the other
competitive deep learning methods for pedestrian detection
[32], [33], [11], [31]. Figure 3 shows the overall performance
on Caltech test dataset (reasonable) with all deep models.

V. C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORK

In this paper, we present the TPDCNN approach as a
robust pedestrian detector. In order to address the problems
resulting from data imbalance and critical negative examples
in training a pedestrian classifier, TPDCNN combines two
deep CNN models that are assigned with distinct missions
during the training phase. We introduce a concise structure
from GoogLeNet with fewer inceptions and build our proposed models based on this structure at first. The proposed
TPDCNN model is then combined with ACF object proposal
and bounding box regression to enhance the efficiency and
reliability of pedestrian detection. The performance is boosted
as we integrate these two deep CNNs to form TPDCNN. Our
approach achieves more favorable performance on Caltech
dataset, a widely adopted public benchmark, than the other
deep-learning pedestrian-detection approaches compared.
In the future, we plan to fortify this method by combining
the two parallel networks as a whole rather than just averaging
the outputs of the individual networks. Introducing more
than two parallel networks may also improve this method.
Also, considering dynamic features (such as optical flow) and
additional pedestrian- or scene-related attributes as a multitask learning is also potentially useful for further performance
improvement.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This paper was supported in part under the project MOST
104-2221-E-001-023-MY2.
R EFERENCES
[1] E. Coelingh, A. Eidehall, and M. Bengtsson, Collision warning with full
auto brake and pedestrian detection - a practical example of automatic
emergency braking, in ITSC, 2010.
[2] A. Ess, B. Leibe, K. Schindler, , and L. van Gool, A mobile vision
system for robust multi-person tracking, in CVPR, 2008.
[3] S. Chen, K. Lin, C. Chen, and Y. Hung, Location-aware object detection
via coherent region grouping, in ICASSP, 2015.
[4] O. Russakovsky, J. Deng, H. Su, J. Krause, S. Satheesh, S. Ma,
Z. Huang, A. Karpathy, A. Khosla, M. Bernstein, A. C. Berg, and L. F.F.,
ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge, IJCV, 2015.
[5] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton, Imagenet classification
with deep convolutional neural networks, in NIPS, 2012.
[6] R. Girshick, J. Donahue, T. Darrell, and J. Malik, Rich feature
hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation,
in CVPR, 2014.
[7] D. Erhan, C. Szegedy, A. Toshev, and D. Anguelov, Scalable object
detection using deep neural networks, in CVPR, 2014.
[8] C. Farabet, C. Couprie, L. Najman, and Y. LeCun, Learning hierarchical
features for scene labeling, PAMI, 2013.
[9] C. Szegedy, W. Liu, Y. Jia, P. Sermanet, S. Reed, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan,
V. Vanhoucke, and A. Rabinovich, Going deeper with convolutions,
in CVPR, 2015.
[10] K. Simonyan and A. Zisserman, Very deep convolutional networks for
large-scale image recognition, in ICLR, 2015.
[11] J. Hosang, M. Omran, R. Benenson, and B. Schiele, Taking a deeper
look at pedestrians, in CVPR, 2015.
[12] P. Dollar, C. Wojek, B. Schiele, and P. Perona, Pedestrian detection:
An evaluation of the state of the art, PAMI, 2012.
[13] P. Viola, M. Jones, and D. Snow, Detecting pedestrians using patterns
of motion and appearance, in ICCV, 2003.
[14] D. Lowe, Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints,
IJCV, 2004.
[15] N. Dalal and B. Triggs, Histograms of oriented gradients for human
detection, in CVPR, 2005.

[16] X. Wang, T. Han, and S. Yan, An hog-lbp human detector with partial
occlusion handling, in ICCV, 2009.
[17] P. Felzenszwalb, R. Girshick, D. McAllester, and D. Ramanan, Object
detection with discriminatively trained part-based models, PAMI, 2010.
[18] Z. Lin and L. Davis, Shape-based human detection and segmentation
via hierarchical part-template matching, PAMI, 2010.
[19] L. Zhu, Y. Chen, and A. Yuille, Learning a hierarchical deformable
template for rapid deformable object parsing, PAMI, 2010.
[20] P. Dollar, Z. Tu, P. Perona, and S. Belongie, Integral channel features,
in BMVC, 2009.
[21] P. Dollar, R. Appel, and W. Kienzle, Crosstalk cascades for frame-rate
pedestrian detection, in ECCV, 2012.
[22] P. Dollar, R. Appel, S. Belongie, and P. Perona, Fast feature pyramids
for object detection, PAMI, 2014.
[23] W. Ke, Y. Zhang, P. Wei, Q. Ye, and J. Jiao, Pedestrian detection via
pca filters based convolutional channel features, in ICASSP, 2015.
[24] S. Zhang, R. Benenson, and B. Schiele, Filtered channel features for
pedestrian detection, in CVPR, 2015.
[25] P. Sermanet, K. Kavukcuoglu, S. Chintala, and Y. LeCun, Pedestrian
detection with unsupervised multi-stage feature learning, in CVPR,
2013.
[26] W. Ouyang and X. Wang, A discriminative deep model for pedestrian
detection with occlusion handling, in CVPR, 2012.
[27] W. Ouyang, X. Zeng, and X. Wang, Modeling mutual visibility
relationship with a deep model in pedestrian detection, in CVPR, 2013.
[28] W. Ouyang and X. Wang, Joint deep learning for pedestrian detection,
in ICCV, 2013.
[29] X. Zeng, W. Ouyang, and X. Wang, Multi-stage contextual deep
learning for pedestrian detection, in ICCV, 2013.
[30] P. Luo, Y. Tian, X. Wang, and X. Tang, Switchable deep network for
pedestrian detection, in CVPR, 2014.
[31] Y. Tian, P. Luo, X. Wang, and X. Tang, Pedestrian detection aided by
deep learning semantic tasks, in CVPR, 2015.
[32] A. Angelova, A. Krizhevsky, and V. Vanhouck, Pedestrian detection
with a large-field-of-view deep network, in ICRA, 2015.
[33] A. Angelova, A. Krizhevsky, V. Vanhoucke, A. Ogale, and D. Ferguson,
Real-time pedestrian detection with deep network cascades, in BMVC,
2015.
[34] J. Uijlings, K. van de Sande, T. Gevers, and A. Smeulders, Selective
search for object recognition, IJCV, 2013.
[35] P. Dollar, Piotrs Computer Vision Matlab Toolbox (PMT), http:
//vision.ucsd.edu/pdollar/toolbox/doc/index.html.
[36] Princeton Vision Group, A gpu implementation of googlenet, http:
//vision.princeton.edu/pvt/GoogLeNet.
[37] Y. Jia, E. Shelhamer, J. Donahue, S. Karayev, J. Long, R. Girshick,
S. Guadarrama, and T. Darrell, Caffe: Convolutional architecture for
fast feature embedding, in ACM MM, 2014.