MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012507147 · doi:10.1142/s0219843612500302

A SINGLE-OBJECT TRACKING METHOD FOR ROBOTS USING OBJECT-BASED VISUAL ATTENTION

2012· article· en· W2012507147 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Humanoid Robotics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDiscriminative modelComputer visionSegmentationObject (grammar)Video trackingTracking (education)Object detectionFeature (linguistics)Component (thermodynamics)RobotEye trackingPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is a quite challenging problem for robots to track the target in complex environment due to appearance changes of the target and background, large variation of motion, partial and full occlusion, motion of the camera and so on. However, humans are capable to cope with these difficulties by using their cognitive capability, mainly including the visual attention and learning mechanisms. This paper therefore presents a single-object tracking method for robots based on the object-based attention mechanism. This tracking method consists of four modules: pre-attentive segmentation, top-down attentional selection, post-attentive processing and online learning of the target model. The pre-attentive segmentation module first divides the scene into uniform proto-objects. Then the top-down attention module selects one proto-object over the predicted region by using a discriminative feature of the target. The post-attentive processing module then validates the attended proto-object. If it is confirmed to be the target, it is used to obtain the complete target region. Otherwise, the recovery mechanism is automatically triggered to globally search for the target. Given the complete target region, the online learning algorithm autonomously updates the target model, which consists of appearance and saliency components. The saliency component is used to automatically select a discriminative feature for top-down attention, while the appearance component is used for bias estimation in the top-down attention module and validation in the post-attentive processing module. Experiments have shown that this proposed method outperforms other algorithms without using attention for tracking a single target in cluttered and dynamically changing environment.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.311 · 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