MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122996330 · doi:10.1109/icpr.2002.1048492

Automated feature registration for robust tracking methods

2003· article· en· W2122996330 on OpenAlexaff
S. Arseneau, Jeremy R. Cooperstock

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSalientA priori and a posterioriMatching (statistics)Tracking (education)Feature (linguistics)Independence (probability theory)PixelFeature trackingFeature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tracking people within a scene has been a longstanding challenge in the field of computer vision. A common approach involves matching the background against the incoming video stream, with the assumption that any unmatched pixels belong to the people being tracked. Such methods, however, seem intrinsically flawed, as they do not incorporate any specific characteristics of the target in question, such as motion or shape and their performance tends be both limited and contingent upon a semi-static background. To overcome these deficiencies, we propose a saliency-based approach, which requires minimal a priori information concerning the target. Motion characteristics dictate a saliency map and highly salient regions contribute to the automated acquisition of target-specific features. In addition to improved robustness, the algorithm offers the advantages of independence from a background model and requires no explicit interaction with the user, nor imposes any restrictions on the target.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207