Obstructed Target Tracking in Urban Environments
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate tracking in urban environments necessitates target birth, survival, and detection models that quantify the impact of terrain and building geometry on the sequential estimation procedure. Current efforts assume that target trajectories are limited to fixed paths, such as road networks. In these settings a single airborne platform with a downward-facing camera is capable of fully observing a target, outside of a few obstructed regions that can be determined a priori (e.g. tunnels). However, many practical target types are not necessarily restricted to road networks and thus require knowledge of azimuthal shadowed regions to the sensor. In this paper, we propose the integration of geospatial data for an urban environment into a particle filter realization of a random finite set target tracking algorithm. Specifically, we use 3D building polygons to compute the azimuthal shadowed regions with respect to deployed sensor location. The particle filter predict and update steps are modified such that (1) target births are assumed to occur in line-of-sight (LOS) regions, (2) targets do not move into obstructions, (3) true target detections only occur in LOS regions. The localization error performance improvement for a single target Bernoulli filter under these modifications is presented using freely available building vector data of New York City.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it