Region tracking via local statistics and level set PDEs
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tracking of regions in image sequences plays a fundamental role in applications (search and retrieval in video databases, object based coding such as in MPEG-4, surveillance), and although numerous approaches to region tracking have been developed, they all suffer from severe constraints imposed on the nature of the image sequence. Some assume a particular motion model or constrain the range of interframe motion, while others constrain both the region tracked and the background to have uniform and contrasting intensities. As a result, these tracking algorithms become byproducts of algorithms for motion or intensity boundary detection, and thus have limited applicability. We propose a novel algorithm for region tracking that uses the Bayesian framework for tracking previously developed. We extend this framework by re-expressing tracking in terms of Kullback-Leibler divergence of specific probability distributions and generalizing these to empirical distributions computed over image neighborhoods, leading to level set equations in terms of local image statistics. The main novelty of our proposed algorithm is that contrary to other tracking algorithms which are expressed as level set PDEs, the motion is not assumed to be small, nor is the background assumed to be stationary, nor is the region supposed to be uniform and have strong contrast with the background. We illustrate the performance of our algorithm on real image sequences with natural motion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it