MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2864882831 · doi:10.1142/s1793351x18400135

A Fast-Iterative Data Association Technique for Multiple Object Tracking

2018· article· en· W2864882831 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 Journal of Semantic Computing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVideo trackingBenchmark (surveying)Overhead (engineering)Artificial intelligenceFocus (optics)Data associationComputer visionTracking (education)Set (abstract data type)Object (grammar)Data setIterative methodObject detectionData miningReal-time computingPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmFilter (signal processing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A massive amount of video data is recorded daily for forensic post analysis and computer vision applications. The analyses of this data often require multiple object tracking (MOT). Advancements in image analysis algorithms and global optimization techniques have improved the accuracy of MOT, often at the cost of slow processing speed which limits its applications only to small video datasets. With the focus on speed, a fast-iterative data association technique (FIDA) for MOT that uses a tracking-by-detection paradigm and finds a locally optimal solution with a low computational overhead is introduced. The performance analyses conducted on a set of benchmark video datasets show that the proposed technique is significantly faster (50–600 times) than the existing state-of-the-art techniques that produce a comparable tracking accuracy.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
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 science0.0020.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.316 · 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