MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006956654 · doi:10.1117/12.544438

<title>Fuzzy-logic-based multitarget tracker</title>

2004· article· en· W2006956654 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Shehata Gad, M. Farooq

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of multisensor-multitarget tracking is mainly dependent on the data association. In this paper, the fuzzy logic-based single target tracker is extended to the multitarget case. Multitarget scenario incorporating four targets both maneuvering and non-maneuvering in the same surveillance volume is analyzed. The proposed multitarget tracker, also called the Multitarget Tracking - Fuzzy Data Association “MTT-FDA” tracker, employs fuzzy variables capable of resolving the problem of multiple crossing targets. These variables are the rate of change of the target states over a sliding window. It has been observed through simulations that a window size of five time scans is sufficient to yield acceptable results. Moreover, the proposed tracker was exercised against the realistic multitarget data set. The results reveal that the proposed fuzzy tracker yields superior performance compared to other existing tracking schemes.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicVideo Analysis and SummarizationFrench-language works237,207