-50 [@he2016deep] pretrained on ImageNet [@russakovsky2015imagenet]. For computational efficiency here we use only the univariate version of our approach with 25 centers, since the multivariate version requires optimizing a precision matrix of size $1,000 \times 1,000$.

**Pedestrian counting.** Figure \[fig:ucsd\] shows the results of our approach on the realistic problem of pedestrian counting from images on the UCSD dataset, together with the training and validation losses. We compare with [@dalal2005histograms] that uses low level image features, [@felzenszwalb2008discriminatively] relying on a person detection method specifically trained for the task, and [@chan2012counting] which employs motion segmentation masks. Unlike these methods, we do not use either motion segmentation masks or class specific detectors. We use only global image features extracted from a pretrained deep network, and we manage to obtain comparable performance with [@chan2012counting], while greatly outperforming [@dalal2005histograms; @felzenszwalb2008discriminatively].

**Generic object counting.** In table \[tab:voc\] the goal is generic object counting on the VOC-2007 generic object dataset. We compare with the set of models proposed in the very recent deep learning method of [@chattopadhyay2017counting]. Our features are extracted from a pretrained deep learning model, while theirs are specifically fine-tuned for this counting task. We outperform their *“glance"* models, which similar to us, rely on global image features. We additionally obtain comparable performance to *aso-sub-ft-1L-3$\times$3* and *seq-sub-ft-3$\times$3* which rely on local image information, as they divide each image into a 3$\times$3 grid and extract features from each cell. It is worthwhile noting that we use only 25 data centers for computing the kernel matrix, and achieve comparable performance with methods relying on stronger features. These results support our approach.

Conclusions
===========

This work brings forth an asymmetric kernel for the Gaussian Process model. This encompasses three components: (i) training on training centers only, (ii) learning individualized kernel metrics per center and, (iii) extending the lengthscale hyper-parameter to a precision matrix, thus learning not only the appropriate size but also the shape in the kernel metric. Due to the limitations imposed by
-50 [ @he2016deep ] pretrained on ImageNet [ @russakovsky2015imagenet ]. For computational efficiency here we use only the univariate version of our approach with 25 center, since the multivariate version requires optimize a preciseness matrix of size $ 1,000 \times 1,000$. 

 * * Pedestrian counting. * * Figure   \[fig: ucsd\ ] shows the consequence of our approach on the realistic trouble of pedestrian count from images on the UCSD dataset, together with the education and validation losses. We compare with [ @dalal2005histograms ] that use broken level prototype features, [ @felzenszwalb2008discriminatively ] relying on a person signal detection method specifically trained for the task, and [ @chan2012counting ] which hire motion segmentation mask. Unlike these methods, we do not practice either motion division masks or class specific detectors. We practice only global image features extracted from a pretrained deep net, and we pull off to obtain comparable performance with [ @chan2012counting ], while greatly outperforming [ @dalal2005histograms; @felzenszwalb2008discriminatively ]. 

 * * Generic object counting. * * In table   \[tab: voc\ ] the goal is generic object counting on the VOC-2007 generic aim dataset. We compare with the stage set of models aim in the very late deep learning method of [ @chattopadhyay2017counting ]. Our features are extracted from a pretrained deep learning model, while theirs are specifically very well - tuned for this counting task. We outperform their * “ glance " * models, which similar to us, trust on global image features. We additionally obtain comparable performance to * aso - sub - ft-1L-3$\times$3 * and * seq - sub - ft-3$\times$3 * which trust on local persona information, as they divide each image into a 3$\times$3 grid and extract features from each cell. It is worthwhile note that we use only 25 data centers for calculate the kernel matrix, and achieve comparable performance with methods relying on stronger features. These consequence support our access. 

 Conclusions 
 = = = = = = = = = = = 

 This employment brings forth an asymmetrical kernel for the Gaussian Process model. This encompasses three components: (one) training on education centers only, (ii) learning individualized kernel metric function per center and, (iii) extending the lengthscale hyper - parameter to a precision matrix, thus learn not only the appropriate size but also the human body in the kernel metric. Due to the limitations imposed by
-50 [@he2016feep] pretrained on ImageKet [@russakovsky2015imagenet]. For ckmputatiunal efficiency here we use lnoy tht univariate versiov of our wpproach witi 25 centers, since the mulbnvarizbe vexsmon requires opjimizing a psecision matrif uf size $1,000 \times 1,000$.

**Pedestrian counting.** Fidure \[fig:icdd\] shows the rgsultx of klr approach on the realistic prkblem oh pedestrian cointing from images on the KCSD dataset, together aith the trqinigt and validagion losses. We compare with [@dalal2005histograms] that uses low kevel imagg rewjures, [@felzenwzwalf2008discriminatlnely] renying om a person detcctioi merhod specifically tramned for the task, anq [@chan2012couttnng] which employs motuob segkentdtiov marks. Uiliie thede jethods, we do not use either motion segmtntwnoon masks or class s[ecific detectors. We use only global imdge features extracted fron a pretrained deep ngtwork, and we manage to obtain comparable performance with [@whan2012ckjntnkn], whkoe greatly outperforming [@dalal2005histograms; @felzenfawsln2008discriminativeln].

**Generic object coinhimd.** In table \[tab:xoc\] thz gkal is generic objfct cougting on the VJC-2007 grneric object dataset. We conpare with tke wet of models proplsed in the veri recemt deep learning method of [@dhattopadhywy2017countinf]. Our features ard eqtrawted from a pretrained dee[ learninj modzl, while theors arq specificwlly nhne-tuned for this fountnng tdsk. We outoerform their *“glance"* models, whiri similar to os, selj on globcl imane features. We wdditionally oytain coiparacle perforjance tm *aso-sub-ft-1L-3$\eimes$3* and *seq-vob-ft-3$\times$3* whirh rely og loxal umage ivwormation, as tney dividv tach image into a 3$\times$3 grid ana extract featurzr from each cell. It is wlrvhwhija noting thad we usd only 25 data centcrs for computing the kernen mafrix, and achieve cpmiarable pgrformancq with methodx relying on stronher fxaturer. Thexe tesults support our approach.

Condlusions
===========

Tjis work brings forbh ag asymmetrnc kernel for the Gaussian Process model. This encompasses rhree components: (i) jralning on tramning senters otly, (ii) learning indicidualized kernel metrics per center ahd, (iii) extejding the lengthscale hyper-parameter to a precision matrix, thus learning bot only the approlriaye side yut also ehe diape in the kernek metric. Due to the limitations imposed bv
-50 [@he2016deep] pretrained on ImageNet [@russakovsky2015imagenet]. For here use only univariate version of since multivariate version requires a precision matrix size $1,000 \times 1,000$. **Pedestrian counting.** \[fig:ucsd\] shows the results of our approach on the realistic problem of pedestrian from images on the UCSD dataset, together with the training and validation losses. compare [@dalal2005histograms] uses level image features, [@felzenszwalb2008discriminatively] relying on a person detection method specifically trained for the task, and which employs motion segmentation masks. Unlike these methods, do not use either segmentation masks or class specific We only global features from pretrained deep network, we manage to obtain comparable performance with [@chan2012counting], while greatly outperforming [@dalal2005histograms; @felzenszwalb2008discriminatively]. **Generic object counting.** In \[tab:voc\] the generic object on VOC-2007 object dataset. We the set of models proposed in deep learning method of [@chattopadhyay2017counting]. Our features are from a deep learning model, while theirs are fine-tuned for this counting task. We outperform their models, which similar to us, rely on global image features. We additionally obtain comparable performance and *seq-sub-ft-3$\times$3* which rely local image information, they each into 3$\times$3 grid extract features from each cell. It is worthwhile noting that we only 25 data centers for computing the kernel matrix, and performance methods relying on features. These results support approach. =========== This work brings asymmetric for model. encompasses components: (i) training on centers only, (ii) learning individualized metrics per center and, to a precision matrix, thus learning not only appropriate size but also the shape in kernel metric. Due to the limitations imposed by
-50 [@he2016deep] pretrained on ImageNeT [@russakovsKy2015imaGenEt]. FOr CompUtatIonal efficiencY Here We use only the univariate VersiOn OF our APpRoach With 25 cenTErS, SIncE tHe MulTiVArIate vErsIon requIres optimiZinG a Precision matRIx Of size $1,000 \timeS 1,000$.

**PeDestrian counTinG.** FigurE \[fIg:uCSd\] shoWs tHe resUlts of OUr apprOach on the ReAListic PRoblem oF PEdEstrIan counting from imAGeS On the UCSD datasEt, togeThER wITH thE trAining and vAlIdatiON losses. wE cOMPAre WIth [@dalal2005histoGrams] that usES loW level ImAge FEatureS, [@felzEnSZwaLb2008discriminAtivEly] relyinG on a peRSon deteCTion metHod speCifIcaLly tRAiNeD foR tHE taSK, aNd [@cHAn2012cOunting] wHiCh EmploYs moTION SegmEntAtioN maskS. Unlike these mEthOds, wE Do nOt use EitheR motIoN segmEntatiOn masKs Or class specific DeteCtors. We usE onLy GloBaL imagE FeaturEs eXtrActed frOm a pretRAinEd DEEP nEtwork, and we manage tO oBTAiN comparaBle perFOrMaNCe with [@chAn2012CouNtinG], WHile gReatLY oUtperforMing [@daLAl2005HiStogramS; @fElzensZwAlb2008DisCrimiNAtivEly].

**GenEric objeCt couNTing.** In table \[tab:VOc\] the goal is geNErIC ObJEct cOunTing on the VOc-2007 genERic oBjecT DaTasET. We coMpare WiTH tHE set of models proposeD iN the veRy recEnt deep learniNg method of [@CHATtopadhyAy2017coUNtINg]. Our features aRe extRacted from A PretrainEd deeP learninG model, whiLE Theirs arE spEciFicAllY FInE-tuned for this COUntiNg Task. We oUtpErform tHeiR *“glAncE"* moDeLs, which siMilar to uS, rElY oN gLobAl imaGE featureS. WE adDiTioNally OBtain cOmparAble PeRfORmaNce to *asO-SuB-FT-1L-3$\tiMeS$3* aNd *seQ-suB-fT-3$\timeS$3* whiCH reLy on locAl image inForMAtioN, aS tHey diviDe each image inTo A 3$\times$3 grid AnD exTract fEATures froM each cell. It is worthwhile NOting thAt wE use oNly 25 dAta centerS foR compuTinG The kerNel matRix, anD aChiEVE compARAbLe pErFormance wiTH MetHods rElYing On stronGer features. These reSUltS support our apProAch.

CONClUsiONs
===========

tHis WoRK brINGs forth an asymmeTric kernel FoR ThE Gaussian PROceSs Model. ThIs encomPasseS Three coMponents: (i) Training oN tRainING ceNters only, (iI) learninG individuALized KErNel meTriCs per cEnTer And, (iiI) extenDIng The leNgthscAlE hyper-ParamEtEr to a preCision matrix, thus learninG not onLy the AppRopriate sIze BUt aLso the shaPe in The kernel mEtrIc. DUe to tHe lIMitatIons IMpOseD By
-50 [@he2016deep] pretrain ed on Imag eNet[@r uss ak ovsk y201 5imagenet]. Fo r  com putational efficiencyherewe useo nl y the  univar i at e ver si on  of  o u rappro ach  with 2 5 centers,  si nc e the multiv a ri ate versio n r equires opti miz ing apr eci s ion m atr ix of  size$ 1,000\times 1, 00 0 $.

** P edestri a n  c ount ing.** Figure \[f i g: u csd\] shows th e resu lt s  o f our  ap proach onth e rea l istic p r ob l e m  of pedestrian co unting from ima ges on  t heU CSD da taset ,t oge ther with t he t raining a nd val i dationl osses.We com par e w ith[ @d al al2 00 5 his t og ram s ] t hat uses  l ow  leve l im a g e feat ure s, [ @felz enszwalb2008d isc rimi n ati vely]  rely ingon  a pe rson d etect io n method specif ical ly traine d f or  th etask, and [@ cha n20 12count ing] wh i chem p l o ys  motion segmentati on m as ks. Unli ke the s eme t hods, we  d o n ot u s e  eith er m o ti on segme ntatio n  m as ks or c la ss spe ci fic  de tecto r s. W e useonly glo bal i m age features e x tracted froma  p r e tr a ined  de ep network,  and we m anag e  t o o b taincompa ra b le performance with [@ ch an2012 count ing], while g reatly out p e r forming[@da l al 2 005histograms;  @fel zenszwalb2 0 08discri minat ively].
**Generi c object c oun tin g.* * I n ta ble \[tab:voc \ ]  the  g oal isgen eric ob jec t c oun tin gon the VO C-2007 g en er ic  o bje ct da t aset. We  c omp ar e w ith t h e setof mo dels  p ro p ose d in th e  v e r y re ce nt  dee p l ea rning  met h odof [@ch attopadhy ay2 0 17co un ti ng]. Ou r features ar eextractedfr oma pret r a ined dee p learning model, while theirsare  spec ific ally fine -tu ned fo r t h is cou ntingtask.  W e o u t perfo r m  t hei r*“glance"* m ode ls, w hi ch s imilarto us, rely on glo b alimage feature s.We a d d it ion a ll y  ob ta i n c o m parable perform ance to *a so - su b-ft-1L-3$ \ tim es $3* and  *seq-s ub-ft - 3$\time s$3* whic h rely on  l ocal i mag e informat ion, asthey divi d e eac h  i mageint o a 3$ \t ime s$3 g rid an d  ex tract  featu re s from  each  c ell. Itis worthwhile noting th at weuse o nly  25 datacen t ers  for comp utin g the kern elmat rix,and achie ve c o mp ara b le pe rfor m ance with me tho d s  r elying on s t r o nge r fea tur e s. The se r esults support ou r  approach.

Co nclu s i ons 
== = ==== == ==

This workbri ng s forth an  a symmetric k ernel fo rt he Ga ussian  Proce ss mode l .  T h is enc ompa sse s three c omp on e nts: (i )tr a iningon t ra iningcenter s  onl y ,  (ii) learning i ndivi d u alize d  ke rnelme trics p e r ce nter and,(iii) exten ding t he l ength scale h yp er-par ame te r to a pre c ision mat rix,thus le ar ning  no t only  the a pprop riat esiz e but als o th e  s ha p e i n th e ker ne l me tric. Due to the l imi t ationsim pos e d  by
-50 [@he2016deep]_pretrained on_ImageNet [@russakovsky2015imagenet]. For computational_efficiency here_we_use only_the_univariate version of_our approach with_25 centers, since the_multivariate version requires_optimizing_a precision matrix of size $1,000 \times 1,000$.

**Pedestrian counting.** Figure \[fig:ucsd\] shows the results of_our_approach on_the_realistic_problem of pedestrian counting from_images on the UCSD dataset,_together with_the training and validation losses. We compare with_[@dalal2005histograms]_that uses low_level image features, [@felzenszwalb2008discriminatively] relying on a person detection_method specifically trained for the task,_and [@chan2012counting] which_employs_motion_segmentation masks. Unlike these_methods, we do not use either_motion segmentation masks or class specific_detectors. We use only global image features_extracted from a pretrained deep network,_and we manage to obtain_comparable performance_with [@chan2012counting], while greatly outperforming_[@dalal2005histograms; @felzenszwalb2008discriminatively].

**Generic object_counting.** In_table \[tab:voc\] the goal_is generic object counting on the_VOC-2007 generic object_dataset. We compare with the set_of_models proposed in_the_very_recent deep_learning method of_[@chattopadhyay2017counting]._Our features_are_extracted from a pretrained deep learning_model,_while theirs are specifically fine-tuned for this_counting task. We outperform_their_*“glance"* models, which similar_to us, rely on global_image features. We additionally obtain comparable_performance to_*aso-sub-ft-1L-3$\times$3* and_*seq-sub-ft-3$\times$3* which rely on local image information, as they divide each_image into a 3$\times$3 grid and_extract features from each_cell. It_is_worthwhile noting that_we_use only_25 data centers for computing the kernel_matrix, and_achieve comparable performance with methods relying_on stronger features. These_results_support our approach.

Conclusions
===========

This work brings forth_an asymmetric kernel for the Gaussian_Process model. This encompasses three_components:_(i)_training on training centers only,_(ii) learning individualized kernel metrics per_center and, (iii)_extending the lengthscale hyper-parameter to a precision_matrix,_thus learning not only the appropriate_size_but also the shape in the_kernel_metric._Due to the limitations imposed_by