MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1532681415 · doi:10.1109/icme.2015.7177407

Object tracking using structure-aware binary features

2015· article· en· W1532681415 on OpenAlexafffund
Haoyu Ren, Ze-Nian Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDiscriminative modelArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceBinary numberPattern recognition (psychology)RectangleVideo trackingComputer visionLocal binary patternsDomain (mathematical analysis)Object (grammar)HistogramMathematicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Object tracking is one of the most important components in numerous applications of computer vision. In this paper, the target is represented by a series of binary patterns, where each binary pattern consists of several rectangle pairs in variable size and location. As complementary to traditional binary descriptors, these patterns are extracted in both the intensity domain and the gradient domain. In the tracking process, the RealAdaBoost algorithm is adopted frame by frame to select the meaningful patterns while considering the discriminative ability and the robustness. This is achieved by a penalty term based on the classification margin and structural diversity. As a result, the features good at describing the target and robust to noises will be selected. Experimental results on 10 challenging video sequences demonstrate that the tracking accuracy is significantly improved compared to traditional binary descriptors. It also achieves competitive results with the commonly-used algorithms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207