Computer vision supported pedestrian tracking: A demonstration on trail bridges in rural Rwanda
Fig 6
Scatterplots and linear regressions of manual counting versus motion-activated timestamps of image files for nine day-long observation periods at six bridge sites in November 2019.
Manual and digital file timestamps are aggregated at 60 minute intervals. Poor correlations (R2 range 0–0.4) between these counting methods are observed across all tested sites, suggesting that motion-detector based counting is not a reliable indicator of bridge crossings.
