Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, Volume. 58, Issue 14, 1400002(2021)

Review of Computer Vision Based Object Counting Methods

Ni Jiang, Haiyang Zhou, and Feihong Yu*
Author Affiliations
  • College of Optical Science & Engineering, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310027, China
  • show less
    Figures & Tables(22)
    Schematic diagrams of three models. (a) Regression based object counting model; (b) density estimation based object counting model; (c) multi-task model
    Architecture of multi-scene judgment
    Architecture of FCN-rLSTM
    Input image and generation of density map. (a) Input image; (b) generation of density map
    Architecture of Hydra CNN
    Architecture of MCNN
    Architecture of DecideNet
    Structure of network of combined loss function
    Architecture of SaCNN
    Architecture of SFANet
    Architecture of CAT-CNN
    Architecture of FCN-MT
    Architecture of cell segmentation network
    Samples from six crowd datasets. (a) UCSD; (b) Mall; (c) UCF_CC_50; (d) WorldExpo’10; (e) Shanghai Tech Part A; (f) Shanghai Tech Part B
    Samples from three cell datasets. (a) VGG Cells; (b) MBM Cells; (c) Adipocyte Cells
    Samples from two datasets. (a) WebCamT; (b) TRANCOS
    Estimation results on Shanghai Tech dataset generated by SFANet. The first two rows belong to Part B, and the last two rows belong to Part A[58]. (a) Input images; (b) attention maps; (c) density maps; (d) ground truths
    • Table 1. Summary of five public pedestrian datasets

      View table

      Table 1. Summary of five public pedestrian datasets

      DatasetSceneResolutionRangeTotal number of peopleImage No.
      UCSD[65]Same158×23811-46498852000
      Mall[66]Same240×32013-53623252000
      UCF_CC_50[67]DifferentDifferent99-45436397450
      WorldExpo’10[13]Different576×7201-2531999233980
      Shanghai Tech[19]Part ADifferentDifferent33-3139241677482
      Part BDifferent768×10249-57888488716
    • Table 2. Summary of three public cell datasets

      View table

      Table 2. Summary of three public cell datasets

      DatasetResolutionRangeTotal number of cellsImage No.
      VGG Cells[17]256×25674—31735192200
      MBM Cells[40]600×60065—193544644
      Adipocyte Cells[69]150×15048—29931017200
    • Table 3. Comparison of crowd counting models

      View table

      Table 3. Comparison of crowd counting models

      NumberMethodUCSD[65]Mall[66]UCF_CC_50[67]WorldExpo’10[13]SHT A[19]SHT B[19]
      MAERMSEMAERMSEMAERMSEMAERMSEMAERMSEMAERMSE
      1Shang et al.[6]270.311.7
      2CNN boosting[8]1.102.01364.4
      3Marsden et al.[9]85.7131.117.728.6
      4Lempitsky et al.[17]493.4487.1
      5Fiaschi et al.[21]
      6MCNN[19]1.071.35377.6509.111.6110.2173.226.441.3
      7Hydra CNN[11]333.7425.3
      8Wang et al.[25]264.9382.18.683.7124.517.932.4
      9FCN[29]338.6424.5126.5173.523.833.1
      10A-CCNN[30]1.35367.3
      11POCNet[34]1.241.501.825.4812.120.3
      12DecideNet[35]1.521.909.2320.829.4
      13SPN[36]1.031.32259.2335.961.799.59.414.4
      14AM-CNN[43]279.5377.87.8487.3132.715.626.4
      15SCAR[44]259.0374.066.3114.19.515.2
      16Hossain et al.[46]1.281.68271.6391.016.928.4
      17RANet[47]239.8319.459.4102.07.912.9
      18ASNet[48]174.8251.66.657.890.1
      19Wang et al.[49]170.1232.46.557.799.77.411.1
      20Cross-scene[13]1.603.31467.0498.510.7181.8277.732.049.8
      21FF-CNN[51]81.8138.816.526.2
      22MMCNN[52]1.021.181.985.68320.6323.89.191.2128.618.529.3
      23DensityCNN[53]244.6341.86.963.1106.39.116.3
      24SaCNN[55]314.9424.88.586.8139.216.225.8
      25Sang et al.[56]75.8124.911.018.6
      26MRA-CNN[57]240.8352.67.574.2112.511.921.3
      27SFANet[58]0.821.07219.6316.259.899.36.910.9
      28ACCNet[59]1.001.27201.6282.164.3104.18.713.6
      29CAT-CNN[60]235.5324.87.266.7101.711.220.0
      30MSMT-CNN[61]319.5358.19.3
      31GMN[62]95.8133.3
    • Table 4. Comparison of cell counting models

      View table

      Table 4. Comparison of cell counting models

      NumberMethodVGG Cells[17]MBM Cells[40]Adipocyte Cells[69]
      N=32N=50N=10N=15N=25N=50
      1Marsden et al.[9]21.5±4.220.5±3.5
      2Lempitsky et al.[17]3.5±0.2
      3Fiaschi et al.[21]3.2±0.1
      4FCRN-A[18]2.9±0.22.9±0.222.2±11.621.3±9.4
      5Count-ception[40]2.4±0.42.3±0.410.7±2.58.8±2.321.9±2.819.4±2.2
      6Cell-Net[42]2.2±0.59.8±3.2
      7SAU-Net[45]2.6±0.45.7±1.214.2±1.6
      8GMN[62]3.6±0.3
    • Table 5. Comparison of vehicle counting models

      View table

      Table 5. Comparison of vehicle counting models

      NumberMethodWebCamT[12]TRANCOS[11]
      DowntownParkwayGAME 0GAME 1GAME 2GAME 3
      1Lempitsky et al.[17]5.915.1913.7616.7220.7224.36
      2Fiaschi et al.[21]17.7720.1423.6525.99
      3Marsden et al.[9]9.70
      4FCN-rLSTM[10]1.531.634.38
      5CCNN[11]12.4916.5820.0222.41
      6Hydra-CNN[11]3.553.6410.9913.7516.6919.32
      7AMDCN[24]9.7713.1615.0015.87
      8CSRNet[27]3.565.498.5715.04
      9DensityCNN[53]3.174.786.308.26
      10FCN-MT[12]2.742.525.31
    Tools

    Get Citation

    Copy Citation Text

    Ni Jiang, Haiyang Zhou, Feihong Yu. Review of Computer Vision Based Object Counting Methods[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2021, 58(14): 1400002

    Download Citation

    EndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text
    Save article for my favorites
    Paper Information

    Category: Reviews

    Received: Oct. 10, 2020

    Accepted: Dec. 3, 2020

    Published Online: Jun. 30, 2021

    The Author Email: Yu Feihong (feihong@zju.edu.com)

    DOI:10.3788/LOP202158.1400002

    Topics