1 Air Force Office of Scientific Research The Basic Research Manager for the Air Force Distribution...
-
Upload
edgar-fletcher -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
2
Transcript of 1 Air Force Office of Scientific Research The Basic Research Manager for the Air Force Distribution...
1
Air Force Office of Scientific Research
The Basic Research Manager for the Air Force
Distribution authorized to DoD components only (Critical Technology) (10/01/04). Other requests for
this document shall be referred to AFOSR/PIP
Basic Research: Target Basic Research: Target Recognition, Navigation Recognition, Navigation
21 October 200421 October 2004
Dr. Jon SjogrenAFOSR/NM 703-696-6564
www.afosr.af.mil
2
Signals Communication/Surveillance 6.1 Funding Profile FY04
Total Program ATR-Navig
Intramural (lab tasks) $1,035 K $ 625 K
Extramural (university grants) $1,374 K $ 832 K
HBCU/MI, DEPSCoR, DURIP, $1,650 K $ 900 KSTTR, Darpa ISP
MURI $1,838 K $ 0 K
Total Administered $5,897 K $2,357 K
3
• The “Programme” is to move toward Integrated treatment of
– Synthetic Aperture (SAR)
– High Resolution Ranging (HRR)
– Laser Radar (Ladar)
– Infra-Red (IR)
• Image Formation accentuates the target features that you seek
– Gravitate target detection/identification/recognition toward the sensor
• Combine physical models (electromagnetic scattering) with
• Statistical models of reception (Doppler, phase and bearing)
• “Factor in” the clutter and hostile interference
– ‘structure of (radar) clutter as it affects detection has defied solution’ : Army Night Vision Lab
• Study of parameter spaces that describe complex scenes (several moving targets): “General Pattern Theory”, A. Lanterman interprets U. Grenander
Automatic Target Recognition (ATR):Foundations
4
• Colorado State Univ. (Kirby): Self-correlation of images, eigen-object analysis, manifold structures and dimensional reduction of data.
• Georgia Tech. (Lanterman): Pattern recognition, structure of “clutter”.
• UC Santa Cruz (Milanfar): Video fusion, edge-modeling, motion and aliasing.
• Rice University (Baraniuk): Multi-dimensional wavelet transforms; rapid reconstruction of singularities.
• Yale Univ (S. Zucker): Multi-scale texture and color reconstruction; neural techniques based on animal visual recognition.
• Boston Univ. (Clem Karl) Unified enhancement and object extraction for ATR.
• Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. (Yazici): Methods of Representation of continuous groups in design of digital filters.
• Arizona State Univ. (Morrell/Cochran): Adaptive sensing modality.
• Colorado State Univ. (Scharf/Chong): Waveform coding, information-theoretic processing and target/environment modeling. [DARPA]
• SUNY Buffalo (Soumekh): SAR return processing, full Sommerfeld interference model, exploitation of massive computation. [DURIP]
• Geophex Inc. (STTR, $500K): Time Exposure Acoustics (Passive)
Mathematical Methods Enable Sensing
5
Aaron D. Lanterman, Georgia Institute of Technology
Problem• Clutter may have just as much interesting
structure as a target, yielding high false alarm rates
Objective
• ATR algorithms that are robust to scene variability, particularly clutter
• Algorithm-independent performance metrics for ATR problems
Scientific Approach• Instead of trying to “filter out” clutter, allow the
algorithm to estimate the clutter structure along with the targets
• Riding Moore’s law: real-time scene simulation once required an expensive Silicon Graphics; now a cheap PC with a decent graphics card will do!
• Developing metrics based on Kullback-Leibler distances
Accomplishments/Transitions
Inference via Jump-Diffusion Processes
• To facilitate transition, jump-diffusion code is being refactored into flexible, reusable C++ classes employing OpenGL
• Developed Kullback-Leibler metrics for a radar scenario
Pattern-Theoretic Foundations ofAutomatic Target Recognition in Clutter
6
Foundations of ATR with 3-D Data Motivation from the DARPA E3D BAA
•DARPA’s E3D program seeks:–“Efficient techniques for rapidly exploiting 3-D sensor data to precisely locate and recognize targets.”–Achieve specific and detailed milestones.
•Natural questions:–If such a milestone is not reached, is that the fault of the algorithm or the sensor?–What performance from a particular sensor is necessary to achieve a certain level of ATR performance, independent of the question of what algorithm is used?
•AFOSR Foundations of ATR program fills the gap
7
• Derive lower bounds on the performance of any algorithm
•These are based on extraction of features• Feature extraction may involve loss of
information; so use all the data!
• Algorithm design is driven by real-time constraints imposed by current hardware
• Computers keep getting faster; what are the ultimate limits placed by the sensor hardware itself?
•Many ad-hoc algorithms have been built
Foundations of ATR with 3-D Data
Applying the Grenander Program
•Pose is nuisance variable in the ATR problem; pattern theory deals with it head-on
•At a given viewing angle, Target A at one orientation may look much like Target B at a different orientation
8
Multi-scale Geometric Analysis
2-d complex wavelets 3-d hyper-complex wavelets
Richard Baraniuk, Rice University
• Highly directional atomic representation to match signal geometry
• Complex, quaternion, octonion structure matched to piecewise-smooth multi-D signals with singularities along manifolds
• Enables coherent magnitude/phase multi-scale analysis
• Applications: geometric multi-scale estimation, detection, classification, segmentation, compression
Barb
ara
com
ple
x
magnit
ude
real w
avele
t su
bband
com
ple
x
phase
1-d complex wavelet
9
Complex Wavelet Analysis
complex magnitudereal wavelet coefficients
- blue green=0 red+ blue=0 red+
10
Multi-scale Geometric Compression
• Zoom of image compressed using JPEG2000 wavelet encoder
• Strong artifacts at low bit-rates
• Zoom of image compressed using geometry-based WSFQ coder
• Employs cartoon image model combining wavelets and wedgelets
– reduced artifacts– state-of-the-art compression– optimal approximation theorem
• Explicit geometric information in coded bit-stream
• Potential application: multi-scalegeometric target representation
11
Object-Image Metrics & Duality
],[inf],[Obj xxdxud uEuxu
],[inf],[Img xExu
uudxudx
Duality Theorem: ],[],[ ImgObj xudxud
xu: all objects that could have produced the
image.
ux: all images of the object.
x
uObject-Image
Relations
Matching can (in principle)Matching can (in principle) be performed in either object be performed in either object or image space without loss of performance !or image space without loss of performance !
GX n /3 GU n ˆ/2Object Shape Space Image Shape Space
12
Statistical Modeling & Curve EvolutionW. Clement Karl, Boston Univ.
• Challenges– Inclusion of accurate sensor and scene models in curve
evolution methods– Unified enhancement and object extraction for ATR
• Existing Methods– Image enhancement followed by boundary extraction– Physical sensor model often ignored
• Progress– Joint ML-EM and curve evolution allowing explicit inclusion of
sensor anomaly model and target range behavior– Unified anomaly suppression and object extraction
• Application– Laser radar range image target extraction
13
Laser Radar Range Data Example
True Synthetic Range Scene & Initial Curve
Reconstructed Scene & Extracted Object Boundary using statistical sensor and scene model
Laser Radar Observation With Range Anomalies
14
Sensor and Processor Integration for Improved Resolution
P. Milanfar, University of California, Santa Cruz
Problems• Spatial and temporal resolution of available imaging
sensors is not always adequate.
Objective • Improvement of spatial and temporal fidelity and
resolution of video imagery.
• Optimal adaptation of imaging sensor and “impedance match” to post-processor resulting in:
– Improved information transfer from scene to user
– Improved usage of imaging system’s bandwidth
Scientific Approach• Development of fast and robust computational
estimation framework based on L1 norm.
– Prior based on new multi-scale edge model
• Study of performance limits via statistical bounds
– Improved algorithms minimize the lower bounds
• Measurement of information content in space/time
– Feedback to sensor to maximize info. Content
• Verify algorithms and approach on real data.
Accomplishments/Transitions • Algorithms and software suite for resolution
enhancement from video available to AFRL–Video-to-still/Video (gray and color)
• Proof-of concept implementation of sensor optimization implemented on an IEEE 1394 camera.
• Transitions and extensions to– Closed-loop operation of adaptive sensor– Joint optimization and operation of sensor and
resolution enhancement algorithms.
Infrared Sequence from AF Wright Labs
Before After
15
noiseSample )],(*),,([ yxhtyxf kkf
error Translate ),( ,kjjk vff
• Reconstruction Problem: Given the frames, estimate the high resolution image. (Super-resolution)
• Implicit problem: Estimate the motion vectors
Fusion of Multiple Video Frames
Nf
1f2,1v
2f
3,2v
NuisanceParameters
Desired unknowns
),,( tyxf
16
Generic Super-resolution Algorithm
MotionEstimation
ImageReconstruction
17
Effect of Aliasing
How does aliasing affect the ability to estimate translation between sets of images?
Little aliasing Lots of aliasing
Note “false” motions.
18
“Algebraic and Topological Structure for Signal and Image Processing”,
Michael Kirby, Colorado State Univ.
• Large data sets of images or signals often possess “geometric structure” that may be exploited to assist in analysis, classification and representation.
• Failure to exploit such structure leads to inferior solutions.
• Data may be represented by manifolds or algebraic varieties. New algorithms involve
• Geometric, Algebraic, Topological Approaches
• Whitney’s theorem. Nash’s theorem.
• Parameterizing Subspace Optimization Problem
• Smooth optimization over Grassmannians.
• Maxi-min approximation criterion.
Michael Kirby, Department of Mathematics, Colorado State University www.math.colostate.edu/~kirby
19Eigen-image sequence coefficient variation
Image 25
Image 100
Image 200
Shortcomings of Subspace Methods
Problem• Subspace approaches not optimal given large
variations in eigen-coefficients over one person.
• Face images under varying pose and illumination lie on a manifold! (see left)
Objective• Model manifolds directly.
• Classification on manifolds versus subspaces
Applications• Biometrics, human identification, face recognition,
machine lip reading, signal separation.
1
3
2
4Time Time
Michael Kirby, Department of Mathematics, Colorado State University www.math.colostate.edu/~kirby
25 100 200
20
Steven Zucker, David and Lucile Packard Professor,Yale University
Column-to-column
interactions
Primate visual cortex
• Biologically-inspired work funded out of Life Sciences as part of AFOSR/ (NM and NL) Data Fusion Concentration
• Models of the Primate Cortex motivate Visual recognition algorithms that go beyond Edge Detection
• Column-to-Column interaction among vision cells: object recognition through “consistent orientations” e.g. of attached shadow
Cognition and Image Fusion/Recognition
21
Biologically-motivated ATR
Yale modelStandard model China lake
Layer-to-layer interactions
• By contrast, Layer-to-Layer interactions lead to a suite of Non-Linear operators well-suited for Object Detection
• In foggy and other scenes where obscuration is heavy, China Lake database below shows out-performance to Canny model on left (on the right you can see the ship stand out)
• The complementary mathematical theory is based on Unit Tangent Bundle for the shading flow field (the cells detect feature orientation)
22
Vision-based Precision Navigation and Control
• Various Vision Algorithms offer the potential to reduce/eliminate reliance on GPS or other external navigation sources– Optic Flow– Feature Tracking– Bio-Inspired Vision Systems
• Provides the ability to navigate indoors/underground to survey denied targets
• Vision-based control could reduce reliance on onboard IMU systems and improve robustness to extended operating conditions
Sample Aerial Imagery with optic flow vectors
23
A Few Of Many Benefits Arising from ‘Local-Sensing’ Navigation
Agile Autonomous Flight• Ability to navigate without
external aide• Can fly in complex
environments without extensive mission planning
• Self-awareness of surroundings and other movers
• Can build detailed 3D maps, wide area 3D autonomous target search, generate coordinates for active sensor cueing
Indoor Autonomous Agents• Ability to self navigate without
external sources• Can explore complex
environment with no a-priori map
• Self-awareness of potential threats – ability to “hide”
• Can obtain 3D maps of denied targets for mission planning, possible ability to conduct functional defeat of denied targets
24
• To fulfill the Long-Term Challenge “Finding and Tracking” depends on Sensing, mathematical-statistical Signals Analysis, Data Fusion and Bio-mimetics
• Collaboration between AFRL, DARPA and National Agencies to achieve ATR in our lifetime
• AFOSR moves to sparkplug new methodologies in Imaging science that provide the leading edge of surveillance systems development
• Early support and encouragement to the most promising investigators working on problems of critical relevance
• The Benefits to DoD of a research focus, managed by AFOSR should reach beyond a single research generation
Summary