Automated Camera Layout to Satisfy Task-Specific and Floorplan-Specific Coverage Requirements

In many multi-camera vision systems the effect of camera locations on the task-specific quality of service is ignored. Researchers in Computational Geometry have proposed elegant solutions for some sensor location problem classes. Unfortunately, these solutions utilize unrealistic assumptions about the cameras' capabilities that make these algorithms unsuitable for many real-world computer vision applications: unlimited field of view, infinite depth of field, and/or infinite servo precision and speed. In this paper, the general camera placement problem is first defined with assumptions that are more consistent with the capabilities of real-world cameras. The region to be observed by cameras may be volumetric, static or dynamic, and may include holes that are caused, for instance, by columns or furniture in a room that can occlude potential camera views. A subclass of this general problem can be formulated in terms of planar regions that are typical of building floorplans. Given a floorplan to be observed, the problem is then to efficiently compute a camera layout such that certain task-specific constraints are met. A solution to this problem is obtained via binary optimization over a discrete problem space. In experiments the performance of the resulting system is demonstrated with different real floorplans.

On the Performance and Robustness of Managing Reliable Transport Connections

We revisit the problem of connection management for reliable transport. At one extreme, a pure soft-state (SS) approach (as in Delta-t [9]) safely removes the state of a connection at the sender and receiver once the state timers expire without the need for explicit removal messages. And new connections are established without an explicit handshaking phase. On the other hand, a hybrid hard-state/soft-state (HS+SS) approach (as in TCP) uses both explicit handshaking as well as timer-based management of the connection’s state. In this paper, we consider the worst-case scenario of reliable single-message communication, and develop a common analytical model that can be instantiated to capture either the SS approach or the HS+SS approach. We compare the two approaches in terms of goodput, message and state overhead. We also use simulations to compare against other approaches, and evaluate them in terms of correctness (with respect to data loss and duplication) and robustness to bad network conditions (high message loss rate and variable channel delays). Our results show that the SS approach is more robust, and has lower message overhead. On the other hand, SS requires more memory to keep connection states, which reduces goodput. Given memories are getting bigger and cheaper, SS presents the best choice over bandwidth-constrained, error-prone networks.