US5956424A
Expired / Lapsed
US
⏱️ 0.0 years remaining
Low false alarm rate detection for a video image processing based security alarm system
Assignee: ADT Services GmbH
•
Filing: 1996-12-23
•
Granted: 1999-09-21
•
Expires: 2016-12-23
Abstract
Abstract Apparatus (10) and a method for visually monitoring a scene and detecting motion of an intruder within the scene. A camera (C) continually views the scene and produces a representative signal. A processor (12) processes the signal and produces an image (f2) represented by the signal. This image is compared with a similar image (f1) of the scene from a previous point in time. Segments of the later image which differ from segments of the earlier image are identified. A discriminator (14) evaluates these segments to determine if the differences result simply from lighting changes, or the movement of an intruder within the scene. If caused by an intruder, an appropriate indication is provided. An algorithm is employed by which differences from one image to another caused by lighting changes, the effects of motion of objects established within the scene, noise, and aliasing effects are identified so as not to produce false alarms. Those remaining segments are further evaluated to determine if there is an intruder present within the scene.
Inventors
- 👤 John R. Wootton
- 👤 Gregory L. Hobson
Bibliographic Details
Application Number
—
Jurisdiction
US
Data Source
google_patents
Last Synchronized
2026-10-30 02:56
CPC Classifications
G; G08; G08B; G08B13/00; G08B13/18; G08B13/189; G08B13/194; G08B13/196; G08B13/19602; G08B13/19604; G08B13/19606; G08B13/1961; H; H04; H04N; H04N7/00; H04N7/18
Claims Analysis
Total Claims: 10
Claim 1
Independent Claim
241 words
A method of evaluating a scene to determine if an perceived movement within the scene is caused by an intruder into the scene comprising: viewing the scene and creating an image of the scene comprising a plurality of pixels arranged in an array; comparing the image of the scene with a reference image thereof to produce a difference image, producing said difference image including convolving the image with an antialiasing means to eliminate any aliasing effects in the difference image, outlining any segments where possible movement has occurred, determining a ratio of light intensity between each pixel in a segment with each pixel adjacent thereto, and comparing the ratio values for the pixels in a segment of one image with the ratio values for the pixels in the corresponding segment of another image to eliminate the effects of lighting changes; processing the difference image to identify any segments therewithin which, based upon a first predetermined set of criteria, represent spatially constrained movements of an object fixed within the scene, and further processing the difference image to identify any segments therewithin which, based upon a second predetermined set of criteria, represent artifacts not caused by the presence of an intruder within the scene, said segments meeting said first and second sets of criteria being identified as segments not requiring further processing; and, further processing those segments within the difference image which remain to determine if movement therewithin is caused by an intruder.
Claim 2
Independent Claim
241 words
A method of evaluating a scene to determine if an perceived movement within the scene is caused by an intruder into the scene comprising: viewing the scene and creating an image of the scene comprising a plurality of pixels arranged in an array; comparing the image of the scene with a reference image thereof to produce a difference image, producing said difference image including convolving the image with an antialiasing means to eliminate any aliasing effects in the difference image, outlining any segments where possible movement has occurred, determining a ratio of light intensity between each pixel in a segment with each pixel adjacent thereto, and comparing the ratio values for the pixels in a segment of one image with the ratio values for the pixels in the corresponding segment of another image to eliminate the effects of lighting changes; processing the difference image to identify any segments therewithin which, based upon a first predetermined set of criteria, represent spatially constrained movements of an object fixed within the scene, and further processing the difference image to identify any segments therewithin which, based upon a second predetermined set of criteria, represent artifacts not caused by the presence of an intruder within the scene, said segments meeting said first and second sets of criteria being identified as segments not requiring further processing; and, further processing those segments within the difference image which remain to determine if movement therewithin is caused by an intruder.
Claim 3
Dependent Claim
24 words
The method of claim 1 wherein viewing the scene includes continually viewing the scene with a camera producing a two-dimensional image of the scene.
Claim 4
Dependent Claim
19 words
The method of claim 1 wherein processing said difference image includes region growing the segments within the difference image.
Claim 5
Dependent Claim
71 words
The method of claim 3 wherein processing said difference image in accordance with said second predetermined set of criteria further includes determining if each region grown segment within the image in which an artifact occurs is less than a predetermined size, and identifying those segments whose size is less than the predetermined size as resulting from such causes as noise or lighting effects, and not as the result of an intruder.
Claim 6
Dependent Claim
39 words
The method of claim 1 wherein processing the difference image and identifying segments therewithin representing spatially constrained movements of an object fixed within the scene further includes masking those segments within the scene in which said movements are confined.
Claim 7
Dependent Claim
39 words
The method of claim 5 further including processing those masked segments in the scene when a segment in which an intruder may be present overlaps a boundary of a masked segment, but to not otherwise process said masked segment.
Claim 8
Dependent Claim
47 words
The method of claim 1 wherein further including determining if a computed ratio for one pixel and an adjacent pixel in one segment of an image differs by a predetermined threshold value from the computed ratio for the pixels in the corresponding segment of the other image.
Claim 9
Dependent Claim
77 words
The method of claim 7 wherein further including determining if the number of computed ratios for the pixels in the segment of the one image compared with the computed ratio for the pixels in the corresponding segment of the other image exceed a second threshold value, the result of the comparison, if exceeding the second threshold value, indicating that the difference between the images is the result of the presence of an intruder introduced into the scene.
Claim 10
Dependent Claim
33 words
The method of claim 1 further including updating the reference image of the scene if the comparison of an image with a reference image reveals no possible motion within the scene has occurred.
References Cited (Backward Citations)
US3651252A
Cited
US4161750A
Cited
US4257063A
Cited
US4342987A
Cited
US4364030A
Cited
US4679077A
Cited
US4847485A
Cited
US4952911A
Cited
US4949074A
Cited
US4903009A
Cited
US4967183A
Cited
US4939359A
Cited
US5091780A
Cited
US5101194A
Cited
US5422981A
Cited
US5253070A
Cited
US5305390A
Cited
US5289275A
Cited
US5283551A
Cited
US5517429A
Cited
US5576972A
Cited
US5398057A
Cited
USPTO Annuity & Maintenance Windows
| Annuity Stage | Window Opens | Payment Deadline | Surcharge Period Until | Estimated Fee | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.5 Years (Year 4) | 2002-09-20 | 2003-03-22 | 2003-09-21 | $2000.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 7.5 Years (Year 8) | 2006-09-20 | 2007-03-22 | 2007-09-21 | $3760.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |
| 11.5 Years (Year 12) | 2010-09-20 | 2011-03-22 | 2011-09-21 | $7700.00 | Window Closed / Lapsed |