MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109593202

Track purity and current assignment ratio for target tracking and identification evaluation

2011· article· en· W2109593202 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

VenueInternational Conference on Information Fusion · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterTrack (disk drive)Identification (biology)Computer scienceTracking (education)Radar trackerSensor fusionTracking systemReal-time computingArtificial intelligenceData miningRadarKalman filterTelecommunications
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Performance evaluation of simultaneous tracking and identification (STID) systems consists of measures of performance, measures of effectiveness, and measures of force effectiveness. To investigate the capability of STID, we extend track purity to a current assignment ratio. Track purity determines the correctly associated measurements for a given scan where as the Current Assignment Ratio (CAR) determines the correct measurements for a given track. Using the CAR aids sensor management algorithms in determining which targets have robust features for target identification in clutter, such that the target can be tracked. The CAR enables effectiveness evaluation of STID systems for mission success. In the paper, we review the fusion performance evaluation literature, outline STID metrics, and demonstrate the use of the CAR in a scenario.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

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 communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.216 · 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