MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1585116509 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2015.7129345

Moving objects tracking from most probable regions and eliminating camera motion

2015· article· en· W1585116509 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Anvaripour, Shahpour Alirezaee, Majid Ahmadi, Sima Soltanpour

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceTracking (education)Focus (optics)Match movingObject (grammar)Position (finance)Video trackingResidualObject detectionPyramid (geometry)GaussianMotion (physics)Pattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel method for moving object tracking in different scales. There are researches in tracking objects but most of them focus on specific subject and fail in some conditions such as changing position, moving camera, changing scale because of the distance variations. Camera movement is one of the most challenging events which causes to have a lot of fake moving objects in scenes. In this paper we modify KLT (Kanade- Lucas- Tomasi) algorithm by spectral residual in different Gaussian pyramid scales and extract positions with high probability of objects presence. To achieve perfect tracking, consecutive frames are rectified by finding the best matches between features points and remove undesired effects of camera movements. To evaluate the proposed approach, we arrange experiments using standard databases and compare with the other methods reported in the literature. The results indicate that the proposed approach is capable of detecting and tracking all the moving objects in acceptable accuracy rate, i.e., over 90% accuracy in average in all challenging databases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207