<title>A multiple-model probability hypothesis density filter for tracking maneuvering targets</title>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tracking multiple targets with uncertain target dynamics is a difficult problem, especially with nonlinear state and/or measurement equations. With multiple targets, representing the full posterior distribution over target states is not practical. The problem becomes even more complicated when the target number varies, in which case the dimensionality of the state space itself becomes a discrete random variable. The Probability Hypothesis Density (PHD) filter, which propagates only the first-order statistical moment (or the PHD) of the full target posterior, has been shown to be a computationally efficient solution to multitarget tracking problems with varying number of targets. The integral of PHD in any region of the state space gives the expected number of targets in that region. With maneuvering targets, detecting and tracking the changes in the target motion model also become important, but current PHD implementations do not provide a mechanism for handling this. The target dynamic model uncertainty can be resolved by assuming multiple models for possible motion modes and then combining the mode-conditioned estimates in a manner similar to the one used in the Interacting Multiple Model (IMM) estimator. In this paper a multiple model implementation of the PHD filter, which approximates the PHD by a set of weighted random samples propagated over time using Sequential Monte Carlo methods, is proposed. The resulting filter can handle nonlinear, non-Gaussian dynamics with uncertain model parameters in multisensor-multitarget tracking scenarios. Simulation results are presented to show the effectiveness of the proposed filter over single-model PHD filters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.022 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".