No. 03of 22LandmarkResearch

Turns any existing camera into a smart camera

One Camera Brain

One system that takes video from cameras a site already owns, runs theft, safety and work-insight rules on it, and seals evidence clips so that tampering shows. Tested on recorded public datasets, not yet on real recorder hardware.

When
Sep – Nov 2026
Status
Built

Progress

Progress75%

The platform is built and tested on recorded public datasets. Not yet tested on real recorder hardware, and no custom model has been trained.

What comes next

  1. Test on a real DVR or NVR.
  2. Fine-tune the detector for crowds, night and fisheye views, the measured gaps.
  3. Record a short demo: live view, alert, sealed evidence clip.

98% / 98%

precision and recall for after-hours intrusion on a shopping-corridor dataset (CAVIAR)

One dataset of recorded footage, not a live site. On the two street datasets the same rule found 3 of 3 and 4 of 4 events.

Benchmark tables and test report (testing/results/tables.md, REPORT.md)Verified. Backed by a file or public page that has been checked.Benchmark tables and test report (testing/results/tables.md, REPORT.md) — Read in the project audit of 13 November 2026.

42 of 42

camera tamper tests detected: covered, defocused and moved

Zero false raises only once the one touring PTZ camera is marked as such.

Tamper results (testing/results/tamper.json)Verified. Backed by a file or public page that has been checked.Tamper results (testing/results/tamper.json) — Read in the project audit of 13 November 2026.

32.6%

recall for person detection in dense crowds (MOT20), at 95.7% precision

The weak spot. Line-crossing recall in the same crowds is 31.8%. On the less crowded MOT16 street set, detection recall is 66.7%.

Benchmark tables (testing/results/tables.md)Verified. Backed by a file or public page that has been checked.Benchmark tables (testing/results/tables.md) — Read in the project audit of 13 November 2026.

9.8ms

median detector time for one 1080p frame (YOLOX-s through CoreML)

On an Apple M3 Ultra with tiling off: about 16 cameras at 5 frames a second per worker. With every frame tiled, the worst case, it is 49.2 ms.

Speed benchmark (testing/results/speed.json)Verified. Backed by a file or public page that has been checked.Speed benchmark (testing/results/speed.json) — Read in the project audit of 13 November 2026.

439

automated tests passing, 1 skipped

From the latest test log. The project's own test report of 2 November 2026 counted 430.

Test log (testing/results/pytest_models2.log)Verified. Backed by a file or public page that has been checked.Test log (testing/results/pytest_models2.log) — Read in the project audit of 13 November 2026.

83.9 / 100

the project's own overall score with the models it runs today

A self-defined score. It would be 86.6 with the best models that may be used commercially, and 91.6 with the best non-commercial ones.

Overall score file (testing/results/overall_score_models2.json)Verified. Backed by a file or public page that has been checked.Overall score file (testing/results/overall_score_models2.json) — Read in the project audit of 13 November 2026.

Exhibit 01 · Scorecard

The benchmark, weak rows included

Measured on recorded public datasets through the product's own code, with one generic zone layout for every video. The two street datasets (MOT16, MOT20) are licensed for non-commercial use and served for evaluation only. Nothing here was measured on a live site or on real recorder hardware.

The benchmark, weak rows included
MeasureResultNoteSource
After-hours intrusion, shopping corridor (CAVIAR)98% precision / 98% recall50 true events.Benchmark tables B3
After-hours intrusion, street (MOT16 and MOT20)3 of 3 and 4 of 4 eventsSeven events in all: too few for a percentage.Benchmark tables B3
Restricted-zone entry, corridor (CAVIAR)97.2% precision / 94.6% recallBenchmark tables B3
Restricted-zone entry, street (MOT16)94.4% precision / 92.7% recallBenchmark tables B3
Restricted-zone entry, dense crowds (MOT20)96.9% precision / 80.7% recallBenchmark tables B3
Person detection, corridor (CAVIAR)89.8% precision / 78.3% recallStrict matching against boxes drawn by people.Benchmark tables B1
Person detection, street (MOT16)88.0% precision / 66.7% recallBenchmark tables B1
Person detection, dense crowds (MOT20)95.7% precision / 32.6% recallWeak spot: two of three people in a crowd are missed.Benchmark tables B1
Line crossing, dense crowds (MOT20)31.8% recallWeak spot: tracks break in crowds.Benchmark tables B3
Person down (UR Fall)53% of lying framesWeak spot. Specificity is 99.8%.Benchmark tables B5
Camera tamper: covered, defocused, moved42 of 42 detectedZero false raises once the one touring PTZ camera is marked.Tamper results
Whole-node run on 28 surveillance cameras (MEVA)118 events from 28 cameras × 120 sEvery event had a sealed clip and the ledger verified intact.Test report B6
Zone alerts in that run, checked by a person56 of 57 sampled alerts real (98.2%)From a manual review of stills, by eye. Not a labeled benchmark.Test report, 2 November 2026
Detector speed, 1080p frame9.8 ms median, 10.6 ms at the 95th percentileYOLOX-s, CoreML, Apple M3 Ultra, tiling off: about 16 cameras at 5 frames a second per worker.Speed benchmark
Alert verifier (vision-language model)accuracy 1.00 on 58 clips, 3.29 s medianA small sample, and the prompt was tuned on the same clips with no held-out set. Not a general accuracy.Verifier benchmark
Cloud load test8,000 simulated nodes: notify in 0.03 s median, 0.04 s at the 99th percentileSimulated nodes, not cameras in the field.Cloud-cell benchmark
Platform test suite439 passed, 1 skippedLatest log. The test report of 2 November counted 430.Test log
Overall system score83.9 / 100The project's own score: 86.6 with the best commercially usable models, 91.6 with the best non-commercial ones.Overall score file

Exhibit 02 · Chart

Recall: where it holds and where it breaks

  1. After-hours intrusion, corridor98.0%

  2. Restricted zone, corridor94.6%

  3. Restricted zone, street92.7%

  4. Restricted zone, dense crowds80.7%

  5. Person detection, corridor78.3%

  6. Person detection, street66.7%

  7. Person down, lying frames53.0%

    Share of lying frames recognized.

  8. Person detection, dense crowds32.6%

    Weak spot.

  9. Line crossing, dense crowds31.8%

    Weak spot.

Scale: 0 to 100%

Recall is the share of true events or people the system found, on recorded public datasets with the YOLOX-s detector. Precision on the detection and event rows stays between 88% and 98%; recall is where crowds hurt.

Exhibit 03 · Gallery

The app, with no camera footage on screen

01

What it is

One Camera Brain is software that turns the cameras a site already has into smart cameras: analog cameras behind a recorder, IP cameras, cloud cameras or a phone. It runs three packs of rules (theft and intrusion, safety, and work insights), grades what each camera is good enough for, seals a signed evidence clip for every alert, and can feed its results back into the site's existing camera software as a virtual camera. It was built to a startup brief, first as a small prototype and then as a much larger platform.

02

The hard part

Other people's cameras. A rule such as "someone is in the restricted zone" is only as good as the detector underneath it, and off-the-shelf detectors miss people who are small, distant or packed into a crowd. Running the product on real footage found 22 problems, each fixed with a test that fails without the fix. A person standing still when the camera started was never detected. Small people on high-definition cameras were missed until the frame was also analyzed in tiles. Video from older recorders could not be read at all. And the brief asked for 98 to 100% accuracy, which the measurements support on some rules and plainly do not on others.

03

What was built

A platform of about 21,400 lines of Python with 10,200 lines of tests. A rules engine with the three packs. Connectors for ONVIF cameras, go2rtc streams and phone cameras. Perception: YOLOX and RF-DETR detectors run through ONNX Runtime, tiled detection for small people, a tracker, and a small vision-language model that double-checks an alert. An evidence ledger in which every clip is hash-sealed and signed, so a changed or missing clip shows. Ways out through MQTT, webhooks and the virtual camera. Around that, a node runtime, a local app for desktop and phone, and the layers for a site cluster and a cloud service. No model was trained for it: every detector is used as released.

04

What was measured

Everything was measured on recorded public datasets, through the product's own code. After-hours intrusion: every event found on two street datasets (3 of 3 and 4 of 4), and 98% precision and recall on a shopping-corridor dataset. Restricted-zone entry on the corridor: 97.2% precision, 94.6% recall. Camera tampering: 42 of 42 detected. The detector takes 9.8 ms for a 1080p frame on an Apple M3 Ultra with tiling off.

The weak spots are reported by the project itself. In dense crowds the detector finds a third of the people (32.6% recall) and line-crossing recall is 31.8%. A person lying on the ground is recognized in 53% of frames. Night and fisheye scenes are worse than daylight ones. The overall score the project gives itself is 83.9 out of 100.

05

What's next

A test on a real DVR or NVR, which has not happened yet. A detector fine-tuned for crowds, night and fisheye views, because those are the measured gaps. A recorded demo, from live view to alert to sealed clip. Also not done: adapters for consumer cloud cameras are untested, and web push, talk-down audio, PTZ presets and tracking across cameras are not built.

Figures

Pipeline diagram in four columns. Cameras you already have: CCTV, IP camera or phone, video file, a phone walk of a site. Edge engine on site: ingest, motion gate, detector, tracker, module rules for shop and safety, event state machine, evidence with blurred heads and a SHA-256 hash chain, and a batch site tracker. Server: FastAPI, security and notifier. Any screen: laptop dashboard, phone, phone push.
Pipeline of the first prototype, September 2026. The numbers on this page come from the later, larger platform.
Three panels of a rendered test scene with crates against a brick wall: "before (aligned)", "after" with a new green crate, and "change 7.84%" with the new crate and a pale panel outlined in red.
The first prototype's site tracker: two walks of the same place, aligned and compared. A rendered test scene, not a real site.

One question

The answer is on this page. Get it right and it goes in your passport on the map.

Challenge

In footage of dense crowds, what share of the people does the detector actually find?

Show the answer

About 33%. 32.6% recall on the MOT20 crowd dataset, at 95.7% precision: it is rarely wrong about a person it reports, but it misses two of three. Source: the project's benchmark tables.

Stack
  • Python
  • FastAPI
  • ONNX Runtime (CoreML)
  • YOLOX
  • RF-DETR
  • BoT-SORT-style tracking
  • qwen3-vl (Ollama)
  • go2rtc
  • PyAV and FFmpeg
  • SQLite
  • Postgres and pgvector
  • MQTT
  • ONVIF
  • Ed25519 signatures