In its original form, a tripwire was an arrangement in which a wire, string, or the like was stretched across a path, and if someone or something happened to trip over the wire or otherwise pull it, some response was triggered. For example, such a response could be detonating a landmine, sounding an alarm, or recording an event (e.g., triggering a counter, camera, etc.). Today, tripwires are often, for example, implemented as beams of light (e.g., laser, infrared, or visible); when someone or something breaks the beam, a response is triggered.
An example of a conventional tripwire using a light beam is shown schematically in FIG. 1. A source generates a beam of light, which is transmitted across a path to a receiver. If the beam is broken, then the receiver no longer receives it. This results in the triggering of some response, as discussed above.
Conventional tripwires are advantageous in that they are at least conceptually simple to use. They also require a minimum of human intervention, once they have been installed.
Conventional tripwires, however, have a number of disadvantages. For example, they can not discriminate between triggering objects of interest and those not of interest. As an example, one may be interested in how many people, but not dogs, walk down a path; however, either a person or a dog would trigger the tripwire. It is also problematic if a group of people walk together, resulting in a single triggering of the tripwire, rather than one for each person.
Furthermore, conventional tripwire arrangements generally involve the installation of dedicated equipment. For example, considering the example of a laser tripwire, a laser source and a laser detector must be installed across a path of interest. Additionally, such dedicated equipment may be difficult to install in such a manner that it is not easily detectable.
Additionally, a conventional tripwire does not afford a high degree of flexibility. Conventional tripwires typically detect if someone or something passes across it, only, without regard to direction of crossing. Furthermore, because they extend in straight lines, only, conventional tripwires are limited as to the regions across which they may be set up.
Conventional video surveillance systems are also in common use today. They are, for example, prevalent in stores, banks, and many other establishments. Video surveillance systems generally involve the use of one or more video cameras, and the video output from the camera or cameras is either recorded for later review or is monitored by a human observer, or both. Such a system is depicted in FIG. 2, where a video camera 1 is trained on the path. Video camera 1 generates video signals, which are transmitted over a communications medium, shown here as a cable 2. Cable 2 feeds one or both of a visual display device 3 and a recording device 4.
In contrast with conventional tripwires, video surveillance systems can differentiate between people and animals (i.e., between objects of interest and objects not of interest) and can differentiate the individuals within a group of people walking together. They further provide flexibility over tripwires, in terms of the shape of the regions they can monitor. Also, because video surveillance systems are so widely used, there is no need to install further equipment. However, video surveillance systems also suffer some drawbacks.
Perhaps the most significant drawback of conventional video surveillance systems is that they require a high degree of human intervention in order to extract information from the video generated. That is, either someone has to be watching the video as it is generated, or someone has to review stored video.
An example of a prior-art video-based surveillance system can be found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,097,429 and 6,091,771 to Seeley et al. (collectively referred to below as “Seeley et al.”). Seeley et al. is directed to a video security system that includes taking snapshots when an intrusion is detected. Seeley et al. addresses some of the problems relating to false alarms and the need to detect some intrusions/intruders but not others. Image differencing techniques and object recognition techniques are used in this capacity. However, there are many differences between Seeley et al. and the present invention, as described below. Among the most severe shortcomings of Seeley et al. is a lack of disclosure as to how detection and recognition are performed. What is disclosed in these areas is in contrast to what is presented in regard to the present invention.
Another example of a video- and other-sensor-based surveillance system is discussed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,696,503 and 5,801,943 to Nasburg (collectively referred to below as “Nasburg”). Nasburg deals with the tracking of vehicles using multiple sensors, including video sensors. “Fingerprints” are developed for vehicles to be tracked and are used to subsequently detect the individual vehicles. While Nasburg does mention the concept of a video tripwire, there is no disclosure as to how such a video tripwire is implemented. Nasburg further differs from the present invention in that it is focused exclusively on detecting and tracking vehicles. In contrast, the present invention, as disclosed and claimed below, is aimed toward detecting arbitrary moving objects, both rigid (like a vehicle) and non-rigid (like a human).
USPTO Backgrounds
USPTO Backgrounds