MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968476015 · doi:10.1109/jstsp.2012.2233459

Detection of Anomalous Trajectory Patterns in Target Tracking via Stochastic Context-Free Grammars and Reciprocal Process Models

2012· article· en· W1968476015 on OpenAlexaff
Mustafa Fanaswala, Vikram Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal Processing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Adelaide
KeywordsComputer scienceTrajectoryReciprocalMarkov chainContext (archaeology)Markov processHidden Markov modelRandom walkBayesian probabilityStochastic processMarkov modelPoint processArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMachine learningMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On meta-level time scales, anomalous trajectories can signify target intent through their shape and eventual destination. Such trajectories exhibit complex spatial patterns and have well defined destinations with long-range dependencies implying that Markov (random-walk) models are unsuitable. How can estimated target tracks be used to detect anomalous trajectories such as circling a building or going past a sequence of checkpoints? This paper develops context-free grammar models and reciprocal Markov models (one dimensional Markov random fields) for modeling spatial trajectories with a known end point. The intent of a target is assumed to be a function of the shape of the trajectory it follows and its intended destination. The stochastic grammar models developed are concerned with trajectory shape classification while the reciprocal Markov models are used for destination prediction. Towards this goal, Bayesian signal processing algorithms with polynomial complexity are presented. The versatility of such models is illustrated with tracking applications in surveillance.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations77
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Signal ProcessingSame topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207