Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Principle comparison of between US, DTW and our method.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Overview of the proposed algorithm.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Illustration of similarity distances calculation based on Bayesian fusion.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Example for Bayesian fusion calculation.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Retrieval precision comparisons between DTW and CCA-base, class-based and Bayes fusion.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 1.

List of 30 randomly selected motion groups (each group includes 10 motions).

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 6.

Comparison of retrieval precision of the 30 motion groups.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

PR diagram and matrices comparisons for motion category “pick up box” on the 30 groups.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

The PR diagram comparisons for motion categories on the 30 groups.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

The examples for PR diagram comparisons for motion categories on the whole HDM cut database.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

The PR diagram and matrices comparisons for motion subject “walk” on the entire CMU database.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

The PR diagram for motion subjects on the whole CMU database.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

Examples for motion frames clustering using the FCM in HDM database.

More »

Fig 12 Expand

Fig 13.

Confusion matrices for motion groups “sneak2StepsRStart” using SLBF-based motion retrieval method, calculated on the HDM05 cut database using FCM clustering feature set and the precision-recall diagram.

More »

Fig 13 Expand