MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980171313 · doi:10.1049/iet-ipr.2019.0334

Training approach using the shallow model and hard triplet mining for person re‐identification

2019· article· en· W2980171313 on OpenAlexaff
Hyunguk Choi, Kin‐Choong Yow, Moongu Jeon

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Image Processing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology Promotion
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Computer scienceTraining (meteorology)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningData miningPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi‐target tracking in a non‐overlapping camera network is an active research field, and one of the important problems in it is the person re‐identification problem. In this study, the authors propose an approach to improve the performance of the backbone model in the person re‐identification. Their approach focuses on training a fusion model with a shallow model and making hard triplets with relationship matrices quickly and efficiently. The proposed approach is simple, but it improves the performance of the backbone. In addition, the hard triplet mining in their process is much faster than the conventional approach. Experimental evaluation shows that the proposed approach can improve the performances of the backbone model. The proposed approach improves rank‐1 and mean average precision (mAP) performance by more than 12.54 and 15.44%, respectively, over the backbone models in the Market1501 and DukeMTMC‐reID dataset. The approach also achieves competitive performances compared with state‐of‐the‐art approaches.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Image ProcessingSame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207