MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048929241 · doi:10.1117/12.732273

<title>Track-to-track association using informative prior associations</title>

2007· article· en· W2048929241 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel G. Danu, Abhijit Sinha, Thiagalingam Kirubarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrack (disk drive)Association (psychology)Computer scienceFrame (networking)Artificial intelligenceFusion centerComputer visionAlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a single-frame track-to-track association, due to the local sensors track swapping (switching of the track from an estimated target to another estimated target, under measurement uncertainty conditions), the identities of the fused tracks over several frames are not preserved. The main goal of the proposed track-to-track association method is to link the histories of fused tracks over several frames and avoid track swapping at the fusion center level (e.g. to preserve the continuity of the fused tracks through their identities). In this method, the previous association hypotheses are taken as priors in a multiple-hypothesis association chain. The continuity of the fused tracks over several frames is achieved through the prediction of the fused tracks obtained from a set of best association hypotheses at each frame. Through this, if in computing the fused tracks estimation errors, their identities are taken into account (e.g. the errors of a fused track over all the frames are computed with respect to the same true target), this procedure will improve also the fused track state estimation error. The method and implementation proposed is intended to be used to identify the histories of two or more tracks at the fusion center, and possibly to improve the track-to-track association.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0970.070

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207