skip to main content
10.1145/3606038.3616161acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Rink-Agnostic Hockey Rink Registration

Published:29 October 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Hockey rink registration is a useful tool for aiding and automating sports analysis. When combined with player tracking, it can provide location information of players on the rink by estimating a homography matrix that can warp broadcast video frames onto an overhead template of the rink, or vice versa. However, most existing techniques require accurate ground truth information, which can take many hours to annotate, and only work on the trained rink types. In this paper, we propose a generalized rink registration pipeline that, once trained, can be applied to both seen and unseen rink types with only an overhead rink template and the video frame as inputs. Our pipeline uses domain adaptation techniques, semi-supervised learning, and synthetic data during training to achieve this ability and overcome the lack of non-NHL training data. The proposed method is evaluated on both NHL (source) and non-NHL (target) rink data and the results demonstrate that our approach can generalize to non-NHL rinks, while maintaining competitive performance on NHL rinks.

References

  1. [n. d.]. International Ice Hockey Federation Ice Rink Guide. https://www.iihf. com/en/static/5890/iihf-ice-rink-guideGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Jianhui Chen and James J Little. 2019. Sports camera calibration via synthetic data. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops. 0--0.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Liang-Chieh Chen, George Papandreou, Iasonas Kokkinos, Kevin Murphy, and Alan L Yuille. 2017. Deeplab: Semantic image segmentation with deep convolutional nets, atrous convolution, and fully connected crfs. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 40, 4 (2017), 834--848.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Liang-Chieh Chen, George Papandreou, Florian Schroff, and Hartwig Adam. 2017. Rethinking atrous convolution for semantic image segmentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.05587 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Liang-Chieh Chen, Yukun Zhu, George Papandreou, Florian Schroff, and Hartwig Adam. 2018. Encoder-decoder with atrous separable convolution for semantic image segmentation. In Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV). 801--818.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Yen-Jui Chu, Jheng-Wei Su, Kai-Wen Hsiao, Chi-Yu Lien, Shu-Ho Fan, Min-Chun Hu, Ruen-Rone Lee, Chih-Yuan Yao, and Hung-Kuo Chu. 2022. Sports Field Registration via Keypoints-Aware Label Condition. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 3523--3530.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Daniel DeTone, Tomasz Malisiewicz, and Andrew Rabinovich. 2016. Deep image homography estimation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.03798 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Martin A Fischler and Robert C Bolles. 1981. Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun. ACM 24, 6 (1981), 381--395.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Martin Formánek. [n. d.]. Nokia Arena, Tampere. https://www.eurohockey.com/ arena/2154-nokia-arena-tampere.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Yaroslav Ganin, Evgeniya Ustinova, Hana Ajakan, Pascal Germain, Hugo Larochelle, François Laviolette, Mario Marchand, and Victor Lempitsky. 2016. Domain-adversarial training of neural networks. The journal of machine learning research 17, 1 (2016), 2096--2030.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Golnaz Ghiasi, Yin Cui, Aravind Srinivas, Rui Qian, Tsung-Yi Lin, Ekin D Cubuk, Quoc V Le, and Barret Zoph. 2021. Simple copy-paste is a strong data augmentation method for instance segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2918--2928.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Richard Hartley and Andrew Zisserman. 2003. Multiple view geometry in computer vision. Cambridge university press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Namdar Homayounfar, Sanja Fidler, and Raquel Urtasun. 2017. Sports field localization via deep structured models. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 5212--5220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Lukas Hoyer, Dengxin Dai, and Luc Van Gool. 2022. Daformer: Improving network architectures and training strategies for domain-adaptive semantic segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 9924--9935.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Lukas Hoyer, Dengxin Dai, and Luc Van Gool. 2022. HRDA: Context-aware highresolution domain-adaptive semantic segmentation. In Computer Vision--ECCV 2022: 17th European Conference, Tel Aviv, Israel, October 23--27, 2022, Proceedings, Part XXX. Springer, 372--391.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Lukas Hoyer, Dengxin Dai, Haoran Wang, and Luc Van Gool. 2023. MIC: Masked image consistency for context-enhanced domain adaptation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 11721--11732.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Pavel Iakubovskii. 2019. Segmentation Models Pytorch. https://github.com/ qubvel/segmentation_models.pytorch.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Max Jaderberg, Karen Simonyan, Andrew Zisserman, et al. 2015. Spatial transformer networks. Advances in neural information processing systems 28 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Wei Jiang, Juan Camilo Gamboa Higuera, Baptiste Angles, Weiwei Sun, Mehrsan Javan, and Kwang Moo Yi. 2020. Optimizing through learned errors for accurate sports field registration. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. 201--210.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Matthew CH Lee, Ozan Oktay, Andreas Schuh, Michiel Schaap, and Ben Glocker. 2019. Image-and-spatial transformer networks for structure-guided image registration. In Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention--MICCAI 2019: 22nd International Conference, Shenzhen, China, October 13--17, 2019, Proceedings, Part II 22. Springer, 337--345.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Tsung-Yi Lin, Priya Goyal, Ross Girshick, Kaiming He, and Piotr Dollár. 2017. Focal loss for dense object detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision. 2980--2988.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Jonathan Long, Evan Shelhamer, and Trevor Darrell. 2015. Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 3431--3440.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Mingsheng Long, Yue Cao, Jianmin Wang, and Michael Jordan. 2015. Learning transferable features with deep adaptation networks. In International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 97--105.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. David G Lowe. 2004. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. International journal of computer vision 60, 2 (2004), 91--110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Xiaohan Nie, Shixing Chen, and Raffay Hamid. 2021. A robust and efficient framework for sports-field registration. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. 1936--1944.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. 2015. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention--MICCAI 2015: 18th International Conference, Munich, Germany, October 5--9, 2015, Proceedings, Part III 18. Springer, 234--241.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Ethan Rublee, Vincent Rabaud, Kurt Konolige, and Gary Bradski. 2011. ORB: An efficient alternative to SIFT or SURF. In 2011 International conference on computer vision. Ieee, 2564--2571.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Long Sha, Jennifer Hobbs, Panna Felsen, Xinyu Wei, Patrick Lucey, and Sujoy Ganguly. 2020. End-to-end camera calibration for broadcast videos. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 13627-- 13636.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Feng Shi, Paul Marchwica, Juan Camilo Gamboa Higuera, Michael Jamieson, Mehrsan Javan, and Parthipan Siva. 2022. Self-Supervised Shape Alignment for Sports Field Registration. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. 287--296.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Matthew Sinclair, Andreas Schuh, Karl Hahn, Kersten Petersen, Ying Bai, James Batten, Michiel Schaap, and Ben Glocker. 2022. Atlas-ISTN: joint segmentation, registration and atlas construction with image-and-spatial transformer networks. Medical Image Analysis 78 (2022), 102383.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Antti Tarvainen and Harri Valpola. 2017. Mean teachers are better role models: Weight-averaged consistency targets improve semi-supervised deep learning results. Advances in neural information processing systems 30 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Wilhelm Tranheden, Viktor Olsson, Juliano Pinto, and Lennart Svensson. 2021. Dacs: Domain adaptation via cross-domain mixed sampling. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. 1379--1389.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Evan Weiner. 2009. Not every 200 foot by 85 foot NHL rink is the same. https://www.nhl.com/news/not-every-200-foot-by-85-foot-nhl-rink-isthe-same/c-501626Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Enze Xie, Wenhai Wang, Zhiding Yu, Anima Anandkumar, Jose M Alvarez, and Ping Luo. 2021. SegFormer: Simple and efficient design for semantic segmentation with transformers. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 34 (2021), 12077--12090.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Neng Zhang and Ebroul Izquierdo. 2021. A high accuracy camera calibration method for sport videos. In 2021 International Conference on Visual Communications and Image Processing (VCIP). IEEE, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Qiang Zhou and Xin Li. 2019. STN-homography: Direct estimation of homography parameters for image pairs. Applied Sciences 9, 23 (2019), 5187.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Rink-Agnostic Hockey Rink Registration

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            MMSports '23: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Multimedia Content Analysis in Sports
            October 2023
            174 pages
            ISBN:9798400702693
            DOI:10.1145/3606038

            Copyright © 2023 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 29 October 2023

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate29of49submissions,59%

            Upcoming Conference

            MM '24
            MM '24: The 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia
            October 28 - November 1, 2024
            Melbourne , VIC , Australia
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)64
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader