Tag Archives: MediaPipe

MediaPipe KNIFT: Template-based Feature Matching

Posted by Zhicheng Wang and Genzhi Ye, MediaPipe team

Image Feature Correspondence with KNIFT

In many computer vision applications, a crucial building block is to establish reliable correspondences between different views of an object or scene, forming the foundation for approaches like template matching, image retrieval and structure from motion. Correspondences are usually computed by extracting distinctive view-invariant features such as SIFT or ORB from images. The ability to reliably establish such correspondences enables applications like image stitching to create panoramas or template matching for object recognition in videos (see Figure 1).

Today, we are announcing KNIFT (Keypoint Neural Invariant Feature Transform), a general purpose local feature descriptor similar to SIFT or ORB. Likewise, KNIFT is also a compact vector representation of local image patches that is invariant to uniform scaling, orientation, and illumination changes. However unlike SIFT or ORB, which were engineered with heuristics, KNIFT is an embedding learned directly from a large number of corresponding local patches extracted from nearby video frames. This data driven approach implicitly encodes complex, real-world spatial transformations and lighting changes in the embedding. As a result, the KNIFT feature descriptor appears to be more robust, not only to affine distortions, but to some degree of perspective distortions as well. We are releasing an implementation of KNIFT in MediaPipe and a KNIFT-based template matching demo in the next section to get you started.

Figure 1: Matching a real Stop Sign with a Stop Sign template using KNIFT.

Training Method

In Machine Learning, loosely speaking, training an embedding means finding a mapping that can translate a high dimensional vector, such as an image patch, to a relatively lower dimensional vector, such as a feature descriptor. Ideally, this mapping should have the following property: image patches around a real-world point should have the same or very similar descriptors across different views or illumination changes. We have found real world videos a good source of such corresponding image patches as training data (See Figure 3 and 4) and we use the well-established Triplet Loss (see Figure 2) to train such an embedding. Each triplet consists of an anchor (denoted by a), a positive (p), and a negative (n) feature vector extracted from the corresponding image patches, and d() denotes the Euclidean distance in the feature space.

Figure 2: Triplet Loss Function.

Figure 2: Triplet Loss Function.

Training Data

The training triplets are extracted from all ~1500 video clips in the publicly available YouTube UGC Dataset. We first use an existing heuristically-engineered local feature detector to detect keypoints and compute the affine transform between two frames with a high accuracy (see Figure 4). Then we use this correspondence to find keypoint pairs and extract the patches around these keypoints. Note that the newly identified keypoints may include those that were detected but rejected by geometric verification in the first step. For each pair of matched patches, we randomly apply some form of data augmentation (e.g. random rotation or brightness adjustment) to construct the anchor-positive pair. Finally, we randomly pick an arbitrary patch from another video as the negative to finish the construction of this triplet (see Figure 5).

Figure 3: An example video clip from which we extract training triplets.

Figure 4: Finding frame correspondence using existing local features.

Figure 5: (Top to bottom) Anchor, positive and negative patches.

Hard-negative Triplet Mining

To improve model quality, we use the same hard-negative triplet mining method used by FaceNet training. We first train a base model with randomly selected triplets. Then we implement a pipeline that uses the base model to find semi-hard-negative samples (d(a,p) < d(a,n) < d(a,p)+margin) for each anchor-positive pair (Figure 6). After mixing the randomly selected triplets and hard-negative triplets, we re-train the model with this improved data.

Figure 6: (Top to bottom) Anchor, positive and semi-hard negative patches.

Model Architecture

From model architecture exploration, we have found that a relatively small architecture is sufficient to achieve decent quality, so we use a lightweight version of the Inception architecture as the KNIFT model backbone. The resulting KNIFT descriptor is a 40-dimensional float vector. For more model details, please refer to the KNIFT model card.

Benchmark

We benchmark the KNIFT model inference speed on various devices (computing 200 features) and list them in Table 1.

Table 1: KNIFT performance benchmark.

Table 1: KNIFT performance benchmark.

Quality-wise, we compare the average number of keypoints matched by KNIFT and by ORB (OpenCV implementation) respectively on an in-house benchmark (Table 2). There are many publicly available image matching benchmarks, e.g. 2020 Image Matching Benchmark, but most of them focus on matching landmarks across large perspective changes in relatively high resolution images, and the tasks often require computing thousands of keypoints. In contrast, since we designed KNIFT for matching objects in large scale (i.e. billions of images) online image retrieval tasks, we devised our benchmark to focus on low cost and high precision driven use cases, i.e. 100-200 keypoints computed per image and only ~10 matching keypoints needed for reliably determining a match. In addition, to illustrate the fine-grained performance characteristics of a feature descriptor, we divide and categorize the benchmark set by object types (e.g. 2D planar surface) and image pair relations (e.g. large size difference). In table 2, we compare the average number of keypoints matched by KNIFT and by ORB respectively in each category, based on the same 200 keypoint locations detected in each image by the oFast detector that comes with the ORB implementation in OpenCV.

Table 2: KNIFT vs ORB average number of matched keypoints.

From Table 2, we can see that KNIFT consistently matches more keypoints than ORB by a large margin in every category. Here we acknowledge the fact that KNIFT (40-d float) is considerably larger than ORB (32-d char) and this can have an effort on matching quality. Nevertheless, most local feature benchmarks do not take descriptor size into account so we will follow the convention here.

To make it easy for developers to try KNIFT in MediaPIpe, we have built a local-feature-based template matching solution (see implementation details using MediaPipe in the next section). As a side effect, we can demonstrate the matching quality between KNIFT and ORB visually in side-by-side comparisons like Figure 7 and 9.

Figure 7: Example of “matching 2D planar surface”. (Left) KNIFT 183/240, (Right) ORB 133/240.

In Figure 7, we choose a typical U.S. Stop Sign image from Google Image Search as the template and attempt to match it with the Stop Sign in this video. This example falls into the “matching 2D planar surface” category in Table 2. Using the same 200 keypoint locations detected by oFast and the same RANSAC setting, we show that KNIFT is successful at matching the Stop Sign in 183 frames out of a total of 240 frames. In comparison, ORB matches 133 frames.

Figure 8: Example of “matching 3D untextured object”. Two template images from different views.

Figure 9: Example of “matching 3D untextured object”. (Left) KNIFT 89/150, (Right) ORB 37/150.

Figure 9 shows another matching performance comparison on an example from the “matching 3D untextured object” category in Table 2. Since this example involves large perspective changes of untextured surfaces, which is known to be challenging for local feature descriptors, we use template images from two different views (shown in Figure 8) to improve the matching performance. Again, using the same keypoint locations and RANSAC setting, we show that KNIFT is successful at matching 89 frames out of a total of 150 frames while ORB matches 37 frames.

KNIFT-based Template Matching in MediaPipe

We are releasing the aforementioned template matching solution based on KNIFT in MediaPipe, which is capable of identifying pre-defined image templates and precisely localizing recognized templates on the camera image. There are 3 major components in the template-matching MediaPipe graph shown below:

  • FeatureDetectorCalculator: a calculator that consumes image frames and performs OpenCV oFast detector on the input image and outputs keypoint locations. Moreover, this calculator is also responsible for cropping patches around each keypoint with rotation and scale info and stacking them into a vector for the downstream calculator to process.
  • TfLiteInferenceCalculator with KNIFT model: a calculator that loads the KNIFT tflite model and performs model inference. The input tensor shape is (200, 32, 32, 1), indicating 200 32x32 local patches. The output tensor shape is (200, 40), indicating 200 40-dimensional feature descriptors. By default, the calculator runs the TFLite XNNPACK delegate, but users have the option to select the regular CPU delegate to run at a reduced speed.
  • BoxDetectorCalculator: a calculator that takes pre-computed keypoint locations and KNIFT descriptors and performs feature matching between the current frame and multiple template images. The output of this calculator is a list of TimedBoxProto, which contains the unique id and location of each box as a quadrilateral on the image. Aside from the classic homography RANSAC algorithm, we also apply a perspective transform verification step to ensure that the output quadrilateral does not result in too much skew or a weird shape.

Figure 10: MediaPipe graph of the demo

Demo

In this demo, we chose three different denominations ($1, $5, $20) of U.S. dollar bills as templates and attempted to match them to various real world dollar bills in videos. We resized each input frame to 640x480 pixels, ran the oFast detector to detect 200 keypoints, and used KNIFT to extract feature descriptors from each 32x32 local image patch surrounding these keypoints. We then performed template matching between these video frames and the KNIFT features extracted from the dollar bill templates. This demo runs at 20 FPS on a Pixel 2 Phone CPU with XNNPACK.

Figure 11: Matching different U.S. dollar bills using KNIFT.

Build Your Own Templates

We have provided a set of built-in planar templates in our demo. To make it easy for users to try their own templates, we also provide a tool to build such an index with user generated templates. index_building.pbtxt is a MediaPipe graph that accepts as its input a directory path containing a set of template images. Users can use this graph to compute KNIFT descriptors for all template images (which will be stored in a single file) by 1) replacing the index_proto_filename field in the main graph and the BUILD file and 2) rebuilding the APK file. For step-by-step instructions on how we created the dollar bill demo shown above, please refer to this documentation.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Jiuqiang Tang, Chuo-Ling Chang, Dan Gnanapragasam‎, Howard Zhou, Jianing Wei and Ming Guang Yong for contributing to this blog post.

Alfred Camera: Smart camera features using MediaPipe

Guest post by the Engineering team at Alfred Camera

Please note that the information, uses, and applications expressed in the below post are solely those of our guest author, Alfred Camera.

In this article, we’d like to give you a short overview of Alfred Camera and our experience of using MediaPipe to transform our moving object feature, and how MediaPipe has helped to get things easier to achieve our goals.

What is Alfred Camera?

AlfredCamera logo

Fig.1 Alfred Camera Logo

Alfred Camera is a smart home app for both Android and iOS devices, with over 15 million downloads worldwide. By downloading the app, users are able to turn their spare phones into security cameras and monitors directly, which allows them to watch their homes, shops, pets anytime. The mission of Alfred Camera is to provide affordable home security so that everyone can find peace of mind in this busy world.

The Alfred Camera team is composed of professionals in various fields, including an engineering team with several machine learning and computer vision experts. Our aim is to integrate AI technology into devices that are accessible to everyone.

Machine Learning in Alfred Camera

Alfred Camera currently has a feature called Moving Object Detection, which continuously uses the device’s camera to monitor a target scene. Once it identifies a moving object in the area, the app will begin recording the video and send notifications to the device owner. The machine learning models for detection are hand-crafted and trained by our team using TensorFlow, and run on TensorFlow Lite with good performance even on mid-tier devices. This is important because the app is leveraging old phones and we'd like the feature to reach as many users as possible.

The Challenges

We had started building our AI features at Alfred Camera since 2017. In order to have a solid foundation to support our AI feature requirements for the coming years, we decided to rebuild our real-time video analysis pipeline. At the beginning of the project, the goals were to create a new pipeline which should be 1) modular enough so we could swap core algorithms easily with minimal changes in other parts of the pipeline, 2) having GPU acceleration designed in place, 3) cross-platform as much as possible so there’s no need to create/maintain separate implementations for different platforms. Based on the goals, we had surveyed several open source projects that had the potential but we ended up using none of them as they either fell short on the features or were not providing the readiness/stabilities that we were looking for.

We started a small team to prototype on those goals first for the Android platform. What came later were some tough challenges way above what we originally anticipated. We ran into several major design changes as some key design basics were overlooked. We needed to implement some utilities to do things that sounded trivial but required significant effort to make it right and fast. Dealing with asynchronous processing also led us into a bunch of timing issues, which took the team quite some effort to address. Not to mention debugging on real devices was extremely inefficient and painful.

Things didn't just stop here. Our product is also on iOS and we had to tackle these challenges once again. Moreover, discrepancies in the behavior between the platform-specific implementations introduced additional issues that we needed to resolve.

Even though we finally managed to get the implementations to the confidence level we wanted, that was not a very pleasant experience and we have never stopped thinking if there is a better option.

MediaPipe - A Game Changer

Google open sourced MediaPipe project in June 2019 and it immediately caught our attention. We were surprised by how it is perfectly aligned with the previous goals we set, and has functionalities that could not have been developed with the amount of engineering resources we had as a small company.

We immediately decided to start an evaluation project by building a new product feature directly using MediaPipe to see if it could live up to all the promises.

Migrating to MediaPipe

To start the evaluation, we decided to migrate our existing moving object feature to see what exactly MediaPipe can do.

Our current Moving Object Detection pipeline consists of the following main components:

  • (Moving) Object Detection Model
    As explained earlier, a TensorFlow Lite model trained by our team, tailored to run on mid-tier devices.
  • Low-light Detection and Low-light Filter
    Calculate the average luminance of the scene, and based on the result conditionally process the incoming frames to intensify the brightness of the pixels to let our users see things in the dark. We are also controlling whether we should run the detection or not as the moving object detection model does not work properly when the frame has been processed by the filter.
  • Motion Detection
    Sending frames through Moving Object Detection still consumes a significant amount of power even with a small model like the one we created. Running inferences continuously does not seem to be a good idea as most of the time there may not be any moving object in front of the camera. We decided to implement a gating mechanism where the frames are only being sent to the Moving Object Detection model based on the movements detected from the scene. The detection is done mainly by calculating the differences between two frames with some additional tricks that take the movements detected in a few frames before into consideration.
  • Area of Interest
    This is a mechanism to let users manually mask out the area where they do not want the camera to see. It can also be done automatically based on regional luminance that can be generated by the aforementioned low-light detection component.

Our current implementation has taken GPU into consideration as much as we can. A series of shaders are created to perform the tasks above and the pipeline is designed to avoid moving pixels between CPU/GPU frequently to eliminate the potential performance hits.

The pipeline involves multiple ML models that are conditionally executed, mixed CPU/GPU processing, etc. All the challenges here make it a perfect showcase for how MediaPipe could help develop a complicated pipeline.

Playing with MediaPipe

MediaPipe provides a lot of code samples for any developer to bootstrap with. We took the Object Detection on Android sample that comes with the project to start with because of the similarity with the back-end part of our pipeline. It did take us sometimes to fully understand the design concepts of MediaPipe and all the tools associated. But with the complete documentation and the great responsiveness from the MediaPipe team, we got up to speed soon to do most of the things we wanted.

That being said, there were a few challenges we needed to overcome on the road to full migration. Our original pipeline of Moving Object Detection takes the input frame asynchronously, but MediaPipe has timestamp bound limitations such that we cannot just show the result in an allochronic way. Meanwhile, we need to gather data through JNI in a specific data format. We came up with a workaround that conquered all the issues under the circumstances, which will be mentioned later.

After wrapping our models and the processing logics into calculators and wired them up, we have successfully transformed our existing implementation and created our first MediaPipe Moving Object Detection pipeline like the figure below, running on Android devices:

Fig.2 Moving Object Detection Graph

Fig.2 Moving Object Detection Graph

We do not block the video frame in the main calculation loop, and set the detection result as an input stream to show the annotation on the screen. The whole graph is designed as a multi-functioned process, the left chunk is the debug annotation and video frame output module, and the rest of the calculation occurs in the rest of the graph, e.g., low light detection, motion triggered detection, cropping of the area of interest and the detection process. In this way, the graph process will naturally separate into real-time display and asynchronous calculation.

As a result, we are able to complete a full processing for detection in under 40ms on a device with Snapdragon 660 chipset. MediaPipe’s tight integration with TensorFlow Lite provides us the flexibility to get even more performance gain by leveraging whatever acceleration techniques available (GPU or DSP) on the device.

The following figure shows the current implementation working in action:

Fig.3 Moving Object Detection running in Alfred Camera

Fig.3 Moving Object Detection running in Alfred Camera

After getting things to run on Android, Desktop GPU (OpenGL-ES) emulation was our next target to evaluate. We are already using OpenGL-ES shaders for some computer vision operations in our pipeline. Having the capability to develop the algorithm on desktop, seeing it work in action before deployment onto mobile platforms is a huge benefit to us. The feature was not ready at the time when the project was first released, but MediaPipe team had soon added Desktop GPU emulation support for Linux in follow-up releases to make this possible. We have used the capability to detect and fix some issues in the graphs we created even before we put things on the mobile devices. Although it currently only works on Linux, it is still a big leap forward for us.

Testing the algorithms and making sure they behave as expected is also a challenge for a camera application. MediaPipe helps us simplify this by using pre-recorded MP4 files as input so we could verify the behavior simply by replaying the files. There is also built-in profiling support that makes it easy for us to locate potential performance bottlenecks.

MediaPipe - Exactly What We Were Looking For

The result of the evaluation and the feedback from our engineering team were very positive and promising:

  1. We are able to design/verify the algorithm and complete core implementations directly on the desktop emulation environment, and then migrate to the target platforms with minimum efforts. As a result, complexities of debugging on real devices are greatly reduced.
  2. MediaPipe’s modular design of graphs/calculators enables us to better split up the development into different engineers/teams, try out new pipeline design easily by rewiring the graph, and test the building blocks independently to ensure quality before we put things together.
  3. MediaPipe’s cross-platform design maximizes the reusability and minimizes fragmentation of the implementations we created. Not only are the efforts required to support a new platform greatly reduced, but we are also less worried about the behavior discrepancies on different platforms due to different interpretations of the spec from platform engineers.
  4. Built-in graphics utilities and profiling support saved us a lot of time creating those common facilities and making them right, and we could be more focused on the key designs.
  5. Tight integration with TensorFlow Lite really saves lots of effort for a company like us that heavily depends on TensorFlow, and it still gives us the flexibility to easily interface with other solutions.

With just a few weeks working with MediaPipe, it has shown strong capabilities to fundamentally transform how we develop our products. Without MediaPipe we could have spent months creating the same features without the same level of performance.

Summary

Alfred Camera is designed to bring home security with AI to everyone, and MediaPipe has significantly made achieving that goal easier for our team. From Moving Object Detection to future AI-powered features, we are focusing on transforming a basic security camera use case into a smart housekeeper that can help provide even more context that our users care about. With the support of MediaPipe, we have been able to accelerate our development process and bring the features to the market at an unprecedented speed. Our team is really excited about how MediaPipe could help us progress and discover new possibilities, and is looking forward to the enhancements that are yet to come to the project.

MediaPipe on the Web

Posted by Michael Hays and Tyler Mullen from the MediaPipe team

MediaPipe is a framework for building cross-platform multimodal applied ML pipelines. We have previously demonstrated building and running ML pipelines as MediaPipe graphs on mobile (Android, iOS) and on edge devices like Google Coral. In this article, we are excited to present MediaPipe graphs running live in the web browser, enabled by WebAssembly and accelerated by XNNPack ML Inference Library. By integrating this preview functionality into our web-based Visualizer tool, we provide a playground for quickly iterating over a graph design. Since everything runs directly in the browser, video never leaves the user’s computer and each iteration can be immediately tested on a live webcam stream (and soon, arbitrary video).

Running the MediaPipe face detection example in the Visualizer

Figure 1 shows the running of the MediaPipe face detection example in the Visualizer

MediaPipe Visualizer

MediaPipe Visualizer (see Figure 2) is hosted at viz.mediapipe.dev. MediaPipe graphs can be inspected by pasting graph code into the Editor tab or by uploading that graph file into the Visualizer. A user can pan and zoom into the graphical representation of the graph using the mouse and scroll wheel. The graph will also react to changes made within the editor in real time.

MediaPipe Visualizer hosted at https://viz.mediapipe.dev

Figure 2 MediaPipe Visualizer hosted at https://viz.mediapipe.dev

Demos on MediaPipe Visualizer

We have created several sample Visualizer demos from existing MediaPipe graph examples. These can be seen within the Visualizer by visiting the following addresses in your Chrome browser:

Edge Detection

Face Detection

Hair Segmentation

Hand Tracking

Edge detection
Face detection
Hair segmentation
Hand tracking

Each of these demos can be executed within the browser by clicking on the little running man icon at the top of the editor (it will be greyed out if a non-demo workspace is loaded):

This will open a new tab which will run the current graph (this requires a web-cam).

Implementation Details

In order to maximize portability, we use Emscripten to directly compile all of the necessary C++ code into WebAssembly, which is a special form of low-level assembly code designed specifically for web browsers. At runtime, the web browser creates a virtual machine in which it can execute these instructions very quickly, much faster than traditional JavaScript code.

We also created a simple API for all necessary communications back and forth between JavaScript and C++, to allow us to change and interact with the MediaPipe graph directly from JavaScript. For readers familiar with Android development, you can think of this as a similar process to authoring a C++/Java bridge using the Android NDK.

Finally, we packaged up all the requisite demo assets (ML models and auxiliary text/data files) as individual binary data packages, to be loaded at runtime. And for graphics and rendering, we allow MediaPipe to automatically tap directly into WebGL so that most OpenGL-based calculators can “just work” on the web.

Performance

While executing WebAssembly is generally much faster than pure JavaScript, it is also usually much slower than native C++, so we made several optimizations in order to provide a better user experience. We utilize the GPU for image operations when possible, and opt for using the lightest-weight possible versions of all our ML models (giving up some quality for speed). However, since compute shaders are not widely available for web, we cannot easily make use of TensorFlow Lite GPU machine learning inference, and the resulting CPU inference often ends up being a significant performance bottleneck. So to help alleviate this, we automatically augment our “TfLiteInferenceCalculator” by having it use the XNNPack ML Inference Library, which gives us a 2-3x speedup in most of our applications.

Currently, support for web-based MediaPipe has some important limitations:

  • Only calculators in the demo graphs above may be used
  • The user must edit one of the template graphs; they cannot provide their own from scratch
  • The user cannot add or alter assets
  • The executor for the graph must be single-threaded (i.e. ApplicationThreadExecutor)
  • TensorFlow Lite inference on GPU is not supported

We plan to continue to build upon this new platform to provide developers with much more control, removing many if not all of these limitations (e.g. by allowing for dynamic management of assets). Please follow the MediaPipe tag on the Google Developer blog and Google Developer twitter account. (@googledevs)

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Marat Dukhan, Chuo-Ling Chang, Jianing Wei, Ming Guang Yong, and Matthias Grundmann for contributing to this blog post.

Object Detection and Tracking using MediaPipe

Posted by Ming Guang Yong, Product Manager for MediaPipe

MediaPipe in 2019

MediaPipe is a framework for building cross platform multimodal applied ML pipelines that consist of fast ML inference, classic computer vision, and media processing (e.g. video decoding). MediaPipe was open sourced at CVPR in June 2019 as v0.5.0. Since our first open source version, we have released various ML pipeline examples like

In this blog, we will introduce another MediaPipe example: Object Detection and Tracking. We first describe our newly released box tracking solution, then we explain how it can be connected with Object Detection to provide an Object Detection and Tracking system.

Box Tracking in MediaPipe

In MediaPipe v0.6.7.1, we are excited to release a box tracking solution, that has been powering real-time tracking in Motion Stills, YouTube’s privacy blur, and Google Lens for several years and that is leveraging classic computer vision approaches. Pairing tracking with ML inference results in valuable and efficient pipelines. In this blog, we pair box tracking with object detection to create an object detection and tracking pipeline. With tracking, this pipeline offers several advantages over running detection per frame:

  • It provides instance based tracking, i.e. the object ID is maintained across frames.
  • Detection does not have to run every frame. This enables running heavier detection models that are more accurate while keeping the pipeline lightweight and real-time on mobile devices.
  • Object localization is temporally consistent with the help of tracking, meaning less jitter is observable across frames.

Our general box tracking solution consumes image frames from a video or camera stream, and starting box positions with timestamps, indicating 2D regions of interest to track, and computes the tracked box positions for each frame. In this specific use case, the starting box positions come from object detection, but the starting position can also be provided manually by the user or another system. Our solution consists of three main components: a motion analysis component, a flow packager component, and a box tracking component. Each component is encapsulated as a MediaPipe calculator, and the box tracking solution as a whole is represented as a MediaPipe subgraph shown below.

Visualization of Tracking State for Each Box

MediaPipe Box Tracking Subgraph

The MotionAnalysis calculator extracts features (e.g. high-gradient corners) across the image, tracks those features over time, classifies them into foreground and background features, and estimates both local motion vectors and the global motion model. The FlowPackager calculator packs the estimated motion metadata into an efficient format. The BoxTracker calculator takes this motion metadata from the FlowPackager calculator and the position of starting boxes, and tracks the boxes over time. Using solely the motion data (without the need for the RGB frames) produced by the MotionAnalysis calculator, the BoxTracker calculator tracks individual objects or regions while discriminating from others. To track an input region, we first use the motion data corresponding to this region and employ iteratively reweighted least squares (IRLS) fitting a parametric model to the region’s weighted motion vectors. Each region has a tracking state including its prior, mean velocity, set of inlier and outlier feature IDs, and the region centroid. See the figure below for a visualization of the tracking state, with green arrows indicating motion vectors of inliers, and red arrows indicating motion vectors of outliers. Note that by only relying on feature IDs we implicitly capture the region’s appearance, since each feature’s patch intensity stays roughly constant over time. Additionally, by decomposing a region’s motion into that of the camera motion and the individual object motion, we can even track featureless regions.

Visualization of Tracking State for Each Box

An advantage of our architecture is that by separating motion analysis into a dedicated MediaPipe calculator and tracking features over the whole image, we enable great flexibility and constant computation independent of the number of regions tracked! By not having to rely on the RGB frames during tracking, our tracking solution provides the flexibility to cache the metadata across a batch of frame. Caching enables tracking of regions both backwards and forwards in time; or even sync directly to a specified timestamp for tracking with random access.

Object Detection and Tracking

A MediaPipe example graph for object detection and tracking is shown below. It consists of 4 compute nodes: a PacketResampler calculator, an ObjectDetection subgraph released previously in the MediaPipe object detection example, an ObjectTracking subgraph that wraps around the BoxTracking subgraph discussed above, and a Renderer subgraph that draws the visualization.

MediaPipe Example Graph for Object Detection and Tracking. Boxes in purple are subgraphs.

In general, the ObjectDetection subgraph (which performs ML model inference internally) runs only upon request, e.g. at an arbitrary frame rate or triggered by specific signals. More specifically, in this example PacketResampler temporally subsamples the incoming video frames to 0.5 fps before they are passed into ObjectDetection. This frame rate can be configured differently as an option in PacketResampler.

The ObjectTracking subgraph runs in real-time on every incoming frame to track the detected objects. It expands the BoxTracking subgraph described above with additional functionality: when new detections arrive it uses IoU (Intersection over Union) to associate the current tracked objects/boxes with new detections to remove obsolete or duplicated boxes.

A sample result of this object detection and tracking example can be found below. The left image is the result of running object detection per frame. The right image is the result of running object detection and tracking. Note that the result with tracking is much more stable with less temporal jitter. It also maintains object IDs across frames.

Comparison Between Object Detection Per Frame and Object Detection and Tracking

Follow MediaPipe

This is our first Google Developer blog post for MediaPipe. We look forward to publishing new blog posts related to new MediaPipe ML pipeline examples and features. Please follow the MediaPipe tag on the Google Developer blog and Google Developer twitter account (@googledevs)

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Fan Zhang, Genzhi Ye, Jiuqiang Tang, Jianing Wei, Chuo-Ling Chang, Ming Guang Yong, and Matthias Grundman for building the object detection and tracking solution in MediaPipe and contributing to this blog post.