MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056136942 · doi:10.1109/radar.2013.6585993

Target tracking using particle filter with X-band nautical radar

2013· article· en· W2056136942 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBhattacharyya distanceParticle filterArtificial intelligenceHistogramComputer scienceComputer visionRadarTracking (education)Kernel (algebra)ResamplingFilter (signal processing)Pattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a particle filter (PF) method is proposed for target tracking based on a practical X-band nautical radar image sequence, using two histogram-based target models: a kernel-weighted histogram model and a background-weighted histogram model. In particular, the sampling importance resampling (SIR) particle filter is implemented to provide a recursively probabilistic estimation procedure for target tracking. For the measurement model of the particle filter, a Bhattacharyya coefficient based similarity function is utilized to compare the reference target and target candidate, which are represented by the histogram of the target area in the radar image. Within the PF tracking procedure, both the kernel-weighted and background-weighted models are applied with estimated target tracks compared with the practical GPS data. The experiment shows that both models can effectively complete the target tracking task with the kernel-weighted model performing better when the reference model is accurately selected, with the background-weighted model being more flexible.

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)0.000
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 score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.209 · 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