Slashdot Mirror


Video Surveillance System That Reasons Like a Human

An anonymous reader writes "BRS Labs has created a technology it calls Behavioral Analytics which uses cognitive reasoning, much like the human brain, to process visual data and to identify criminal and terroristic activities. Built on a framework of cognitive learning engines and computer vision, AISight, provides an automated and scalable surveillance solution that analyzes behavioral patterns, activities and scene content without the need for human training, setup, or programming."

34 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. Of course by sopssa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nothing can go wrong!

    1. Re:Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nothing can go wrong!

      Monday September 21, 6:08 PM > System Pawn, ID:1498795, "sopssa" making sarcastic joke regarding system. Execute Order 66. Will be a huge success.

    2. Re:Of course by bugi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The best of both worlds! Human stupidity plus the compassion of a machine.

  2. Proof? by FlyingBishop · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Source or it doesn't work.

    1. Re:Proof? by Jurily · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Mod parent up. Said AI first needs to distinguish between "activity" and "the wind blew a leaf across the screen". Then you need to distinguish between "lights a cigarette" and "lights the fuse on dynamite".

      So, if it already does all that, just one more question: how do you define "criminal and terrorist activities" programmatically when not even the law is clear? Even shooting people can be a non-criminal act.

    2. Re:Proof? by TheWingThing · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It must first differentiate between "time flies like an arrow" and "fruit flies like a banana". Then, and only then, can be the system be trusted.

    3. Re:Proof? by beav007 · · Score: 3, Funny
      What I want to know is: whose cognitive reasoning is it based on, exactly?

      Male?

      Ooh, low cut top! Zoom zoom zoom!
      Wait, the wind is picking up! Initiate scan for pleated skirts!

      Or female?

      Ooh, there's a sale over there! *zoom* Do they have my colour?
      Wait, that handbag's a knockoff! *Dials DHS*

  3. Bit more info - can it be as good as humans? by xmas2003 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A little more info from the BRS Labs website:
    "The system takes the input from existing video security cameras (no need to change equipment); recognizes and identifies the objects in each frame and passes that data to its Machine Learning Engine. There, the system 'learns' what activity is normal for each unique area viewed by each camera. It then stores these LEARNED memories, much the same way the human brain does, and refers back to them with any and all future activities observed by the camera. If any behavior falls outside of the norm, alerts are generated."

    Sounds impressive, but will the algorithms be sophisticated enough to watch grass grow and realize that it's normal behavior for the garbage truck to come by weekly ... but still send an alarm when a burgler steals your stuff!

    --
    Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
    1. Re:Bit more info - can it be as good as humans? by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My guess is it applies a few simple heuristics to analyze the behavior and the real trick is identifying the behavior.

      Example: In an alley behind a hotel people frequently walk out a door, put something in a container, and walk back in. This becomes "normal". Then someone goes out back and starts smoking. Whoops, wtf is this! Alert, alert. OK, so this gets flagged as OK a few times. The system decides it's OK. However, when two people hold a third at gunpoint and linger in an area of the alley not usually used for smoking, this would now trigger as abnormal.

      Another thing it might notice is the same person coming back to the front of a convenience store, waiting a minute, then leaving, then coming back again. Most people only walk in, walk out - this is abnormal.

      So it won't tell you someone is burglarizing you, but it might focus your attention on a camera where something could be happening. I'd assume it would get better over time as things were flagged "ok" or "not ok", but at best it would provide some simple pre-filtering to focus human attention on scenes that are slightly more likely to be "interesting".

    2. Re:Bit more info - can it be as good as humans? by mhajicek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So it's a video Zone Alarm. I imagine the first while of operation would be rather labor intensive.

    3. Re:Bit more info - can it be as good as humans? by droopycom · · Score: 5, Funny

      If it really think like a human, the main feature will be to automatically upload videos of people having sex in elevators on the web.

    4. Re:Bit more info - can it be as good as humans? by Brian+Gordon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No way that it's as complex as that. My guess is that it gets used to linear motion like cars driving by and develops a tolerance for humans walking by on the way to work, but when there's lots of irregular motion in different directions (ie not just from one side of the frame to the other) there's a good chance something unusual is happening.

      Your system lacks the element of "no human training" mentioned in the summary

  4. I'll know it when I see it. by Jason+Pollock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's a press release pretending to be journalism.

    If it doesn't need training, how does it define "terroristic activity"? Is it the "I'll know it when I see it" definition?

    The article seems to indicate it works like a Bayesian filter on the video - pointing out things that aren't typical for the camera.

    Much like any automated system that is supposed to filter out false positives, it is probably pretty easy to train either the operators or the system itself to throttle back the sensitivity to a point where it ignores everything.

    1. Re:I'll know it when I see it. by houghi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it doesn't need training, how does it define "terroristic activity"?

      It works just like a human, so if you have a slightly darker skin color, you are a terrorist. If you buy a ski-mask, you are a terrorist. If you have a weapon, you are a terrorist. If you look around a lot your are a terrorist. If you leave a mosque, you are a terrorist. If you ever where in another country, you are a terrorist. If you talk to somebody who was marked as a terrorist, you are a terrorist.
      You are a terrorist.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  5. It Comforts Me To Know.... by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...that somewhere else in the world, there is a young, badass mother fighting off robots from the future that were designed to look like my Governor in a heroic attempt to destroy this new technology along with her scrappy, but as-of-yet slightly immature son....

    At least, I think that's where we are in the time-line right?

  6. It's a lie by blhack · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The "machine learning engine" is a "datacenter" (warehouse) full of cheap African laborers who are all watching the cameras.

    (this is a joke, it just isn't funny, and it is meant to illustrate a point. See the next line):
    God/nature/FSM/evolution/al gore/$deity has done a pretty damn good job at building our brains, why are we trying to reinvent that wheel in a computer?

     

    --
    NewslilySocial News. No lolcats allowed.
    1. Re:It's a lie by evanbd · · Score: 3, Funny

      The "machine learning engine" is a "datacenter" (warehouse) full of cheap African laborers who are all watching the cameras.

      (this is a joke, it just isn't funny, and it is meant to illustrate a point. See the next line): God/nature/FSM/evolution/al gore/$deity has done a pretty damn good job at building our brains, why are we trying to reinvent that wheel in a computer?

      Because the owners of those brains get all whiny when you try to stick them in jars and make them solve the problems you want to solve, rather than sitting around watching porn? Really, sticking a bunch of brains in a 19" rack is harder than you'd think.

  7. yes, but... by gandhi_2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...does it run racial profiling?

  8. Re:Photos by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So I guess this means that the camera is going to Harass people taking Photos now?

    Even better. It will call some rentacops and tell them that there's "suspected terroristic activity" taking place, and suddenly a tourist will get a taser up some orifice because "the computer" already labeled him a terrorist and therefore Osama's second in command.

  9. Human Intelligence by Reason58 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What a great way to absolve any personal responsibility. Detained wrongfully? Not our fault, the machine said you were moving like a terrorist.

    1. Re:Human Intelligence by LifesABeach · · Score: 2, Funny

      So while facing away from the camera, I see what looks like a quarter, and while bending over, I have this irresistible urge to scratch myself where my back pocket is. At least that's what the Camera will show, on CNN news, and if I have my way, YouTube also. It's convincing my wife, that's all it was; is going to be rough.

    2. Re:Human Intelligence by radtea · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also, I wonder how well these systems will handle contextual clues that people pick up on automatically?

      "Contextual clues" like a dark-skinned guy in London rushing to catch the Tube wearing a ski jacket on a warmish day?

      Those are the kind of "contextual clues" that people use all the time to make lethal misjudgements, and in the case at hand resulted in a completely innocent Brazilian who was legally in Britain going legally about his legal business being murdered by police.

      Given how badly humans are known empirically to suck at making these kinds of judgments only an arrogant idiot would think of programming a machine to emulate us. But of course, arrogant idiots are incapable of adjusting their beliefs in response to empirical data, so they probably aren't even aware of how badly they suck at this.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    3. Re:Human Intelligence by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those are the kind of "contextual clues" that people use all the time to make lethal misjudgements, and in the case at hand resulted in a completely innocent Brazilian who was legally in Britain going legally about his legal business being murdered by police.

      No system lacking full disclosure of all information is perfect. People, by definition, *have* to make judgments without enough information to be sure. Yet we *have* to be sure.

      Sometimes this results in mistakes. And sometimes, those mistakes add up to a lethal combination. But the vast majority of the time, those judgments, lacking full information, seem to do a pretty good job. In fact, even if you compare these judgement rantes to something like the odds that a particular Apache install will be active, you'll find that people, despite their occasional flaws, actually do a pretty damned good job.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  10. Scary by celibate+for+life · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Human judgment isn't accurate enough to distinguish between an actual terrorist and someone who may look like one. Why is there anyone expecting good results from a machine emulating this judgment that isn't reliable in the first place?

  11. False positve and False negative readings by mjensen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Much like detecting terrorists by facial recognition, this is vaporware until they publish some numbers.

    I once had someone misplace a sales call to me, being proud his facial recognition system was 70% accurate. He had no idea how much his system is a pain in the ass when its wrong, and for the airport security business he was trying to get, 90% accuracy is considered terrible.

  12. Re:Ocean's Thirteen that a system like that. by swanzilla · · Score: 2, Funny

    Ocean's Thirteen that a system like that.

    Brad Pitt that an actor in that.

  13. Sick and tired by WillRobinson · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Really I am sick and tired of the surveillance realm. If anybody really wants to do something nefarious they will make sure the cameras don't work. Simply pull them down, spray them with paint or whatever. The authorities will not come running. After the fact usage is good, but really it doesn't stop any crime, even the random ones.We are the ones funding this and do not even have a say in it.

    1. Re:Sick and tired by WillRobinson · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree in business its ok, but really every intersection in Texas has 4 cameras now. Even ones in small towns, paid for by grants from DHS.

      In the Dallas Metroplex, they have also installed networking which is supposed to be used by emergency workers (this makes me laugh as when there is a real disaster they will not have power) but I am sure they are also being used by the cities to read the power and water meters in the future.

      Taking even a small failure rate, the cost of maintenance will be beyond what the cities can stand to keep the systems up. The big brother ideal will fail and only leave us with a bill to pay.

  14. Boobies! by pavon · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, it instinctively directs the cameras towards the hot women all the time, distracted from important things it should look at?

  15. Hopefully not like humans by D4C5CE · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Who, under video surveillance, tend to act rather irresponsibly:
    • Feeling safe(r) when and where they are not, because of the false promise of BB to be watching (over) them.
    • Mostly turning a blind eye on crime (and its victims), as the all-seeing eye of BB and/or "someone (else)" will surely take care of it.
    • Having learned from an early age to show only herd mentality out of preference falsification in their desperate attempts to try and please the watchmen and be seen to obey "like every other good citizen".
    • In the rare instances of courage, not fleeing insurmountable dangers out of the feeling that someone has got to be watching and will send backup any moment now.

    Interestingly in Europe after a series of dreadful incidents on live video, this is finally being debated on the eve of general elections: http://www.piratenpartei.de/node/920/29268#comment-29268 - as at the other end of the line, in a situation room (that may be on the next floor or station, and yet too) far away, officers will have to watch events unfold and wish in vain to finally be out there with a gun again (or have sufficient forces to dispatch), e.g. to stop that attacker they can only videotape and helplessly watch wreak havoc on screen.

  16. Please put down your weapon. You have 20 seconds.. by netsharc · · Score: 2, Funny

    to comply!

    No one talkd about ED-209 yet?

    --
    What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
  17. And it will work as soon as . . . by taustin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    you give us another billion dollars to finish it.

    Yeah, right.

    A 1% error rate will produce a hundred times as many false positives - all innocent people accused of a crime - as real positives. And a 20% error rate is far, far more likely.

    Scams like this are the reason why you have to show up at airports three hours early now.

    Is it smart enough to knwo that "terroristic" isn't a real word, at least?

    1. Re:And it will work as soon as . . . by ImNotAtWork · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "all innocent people accused of a crime"

      Why? Even if the system flags the people as criminals, the operators will still be able to see the recordings, and then decide if it was a crime or not, no?

      If only I had a nickel for every time some one took something off the computer as gospel (figuratively) and could not be swayed because the computer doesn't make mistakes... Think PHBs and customer service reps. Or maybe I missed your sarcasm tags.. if so mia culpa

      --
      open source sub sim. I might start coding again for this. http://dangerdeep.sourceforge.net/contribute/
  18. A Series of Already-solved Problems? by littlewink · · Score: 2, Informative

    To do what AISight does one needs:

    • video software that can track 3-dimensional objects using a 2-dimensional video image. This is a known solved problem.
    • A second layer of software (that uses the first as input) that distinguishes static and moving objects. Static objects form a "background" which can largely be ignored except for collisions with moving objects and except for specific human-input exceptions.
    • A rule database. The initial rule database must have many rules about default object behavior and interactions.
    • A learning system that detects heretofore unseen interactions, alerts a human user and asks for a new rule or validation of the anomaly as something that should cause an alert.

    Moving objects must be dynamically tracked and their behavior somehow segmented into steps. This is arbitrary in that there can be a theoretically infinite variety of such segments for any given macro behavior. E.g., I can say "Mary handed the book to Tom." or I can say "Mary grasped the book, Mary extended her arm in the direction of Tom, Tom extended his hand in the direction of Mary and grasped the book, Mary un-grasped the book, Tom retracted his arm (with the book)." Both describe the same action, but the second has a finer segmentation of behavior.

    All the pieces are available in freeware. It's essentially a classic AI expert system. Since they're getting millions for known technology (and software), I expect to see a freeware version of this available soon!8-))