MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032995671 · doi:10.1117/12.664925

A modified Murty algorithm for multiple hypothesis tracking

2006· article· en· W2032995671 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

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models
Canadian institutionsRaytheon Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterAlgorithmAllowance (engineering)Matrix (chemical analysis)Column (typography)Computer scienceTracking (education)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsEngineeringRadar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present two practical modifications of the original Murty algorithm. First, the algorithm is modified to handle rectangular association matrix. The original Murty algorithm was developed for a square matrix. It is found that the expanding rules should be changed so that the cross-over pair within an assignment can be extended to the last column and can be repeated for the last column upon certain conditions. The second modification is the allowance of an "infeasible" assignment, where some tracks are not assigned with any measurements, therefore, good "infeasible" hypotheses are maintained and clutter seduced hypotheses are suppressed when the information evidence becomes stronger. Examples are used to demonstrate the modifications of the existing Murty algorithm for a practical implementation of an N-best Multiple Hypothesis Tracker.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.254 · 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