MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124919848 · doi:10.1109/tip.2004.836158

Spatiotemporal Motion Boundary Detection and Motion Boundary Velocity Estimation for Tracking Moving Objects With a Moving Camera: A Level Sets PDEs Approach With Concurrent Camera Motion Compensation

2004· article· en· W2124919848 on OpenAlexaff
R. Feghali, Amar Mitiche

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion fieldMotion estimationComputer visionArtificial intelligenceMatch movingMathematicsBoundary (topology)Quarter-pixel motionMotion compensationStructure from motionPartial differential equationMotion (physics)Computer scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to investigate a method of tracking moving objects with a moving camera. This method estimates simultaneously the motion induced by camera movement. The problem is formulated as a Bayesian motion-based partitioning problem in the spatiotemporal domain of the image quence. An energy functional is derived from the Bayesian formulation. The Euler-Lagrange descent equations determine imultaneously an estimate of the image motion field induced by camera motion and an estimate of the spatiotemporal motion undary surface. The Euler-Lagrange equation corresponding to the surface is expressed as a level-set partial differential equation for topology independence and numerically stable implementation. The method can be initialized simply and can track multiple objects with nonsimultaneous motions. Velocities on motion boundaries can be estimated from geometrical properties of the motion boundary. Several examples of experimental verification are given using synthetic and real-image sequences.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations30
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207