MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507792233 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2016.7527408

Weighted residual minimization in PCA subspace for visual tracking

2016· article· en· W2507792233 on OpenAlexaff
B. K. Shreyamsha Kumar, M.N.S. Swamy, M. Omair Ahmad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceSubspace topologyResidualSparse approximationComputer scienceNeural codingPattern recognition (psychology)Bayesian inferenceEye trackingCoding (social sciences)Principal component analysisComputer visionBayesian probabilityAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The success of sparse representation, in face recognition and visual tracking, has attracted much attention in computer vision in spite of its computational complexity. These sparse representation-based methods assume that the coding residual follows either Gaussian or Laplacian distribution, which may not be accurate enough to describe the coding residuals in real scenarios. In order to deal with such issues in visual tracking, a novel generative tracker is proposed in a Bayesian inference framework by exploiting both the robust sparse coding and the principle component analysis (PCA) algorithm. In contrast to the existing algorithms, the proposed method introduces weighted least squares into the PCA reconstruction avoiding the much complex l1-regularization. Further, it is proposed to generate an occlusion map based on weights, and is used to avoid updating the occlusion information during incremental subspace learning. The performance evaluation on the challenging image sequences demonstrates that the proposed method performs favorably when compared with the several state-of-the-art methods.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207