MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078488084 · doi:10.1117/12.642362

Subjective trajectory characterization: acquisition, matching, and retrieval

2006· article· en· W2078488084 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Y. Zhang, Luke Olsen, Jeffrey E. Boyd

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle filterComputer scienceTrajectoryComputer visionArtificial intelligencePosition (finance)Active shape modelHistogramRepresentation (politics)Similarity (geometry)Pattern recognition (psychology)Filter (signal processing)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a system that automatically tracks moving objects in a scene and subjectively characterizes the object trajectories for storage and retrieval. A multi-target color-histogram particle filter combined with besthypothesis data association is the foundation of our trajectory acquisition algorithm. To improve computational performance, we use quasi-Monte-Carlo methods to reduce the number of particles required by each filter. The tracking system operates in real-time to produce a stream of XML documents that contain the object trajectories. To characterize trajectories subjectively, we form a set of shape templates that describes basic maneuvers (e.g., gentle turn right, hard turn left, straight line). Procrustes shape analysis provides a scaleand rotation-invariant mechanism to identify occurrences of these maneuvers within a trajectory. To add spatial information to our trajectory representation, we partition the two-dimensional space under surveillance into a set of mutually exclusive regions. A temporal sequence of region-to-region transitions gives a spatial representation of the trajectory. The shape and position descriptions combine to form a compact, high-level representation of a trajectory. We provide similarity measures for the shape, position, and combined shape and position representations.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207