MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970708737 · doi:10.1109/iccsp.2013.6577049

Multi target tracking algorithm based on Lagrangian Relaxation method

2013· article· en· W1970708737 on OpenAlexaff
Kanan Bala Sahoo, Arati M. Dixit, Srinivasa Murthy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadar trackerComputer scienceTracking (education)RadarSensor fusionTask (project management)Process (computing)Controller (irrigation)Set (abstract data type)Tracking systemData setLagrangian relaxationAlgorithmReal-time computingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionFilter (signal processing)EngineeringMathematicsMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi Target Tracking (MTT) capability of radar increases the extent of control over land and sky. It is a challenging task to provide a coherent air picture to the radar controller in every scan. Multi Sensor Multi Target (MSMT) Data Association (DA) is an important task in an automated Command and Control (C2) system for any Air Defence system. In DA process multiple tracks received for multiple targets from a set of sensors are processed to correlate tracks to targets. The results of DA form a crucial functionality of multi sensor data fusion which is used in target engagement. Multiple Hypothesis Tracking (MHT) methods are very good DA techniques for conflicting scenarios but are complex in design and implementation. A solution methodology is proposed combining Lagrangian Relaxation, dynamic programming and multidimensional assignment approaches.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207