MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998450020 · doi:10.1117/12.734360

<title>Computationally efficient assignment-based algorithms for data association for tracking with angle-only sensors</title>

2007· article· en· W2998450020 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

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData associationAssociation (psychology)Dimension (graph theory)AlgorithmTracking (education)Assignment problemComputer scienceTree (set theory)Association schemeState (computer science)Track (disk drive)Auction algorithmAssociation rule learningData miningMathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we describe computationally efficient assignment-based algorithms to solve the data association problem in synchronous passive multisensor tracking systems. A traditional assignment-based solution to this problem is to solve the measurement-to-measurement association using multidimensional (<i>S</i>-dimensional or SD with <i>S</i> sensors) assignment formulation and the measurement-to-track association using two-dimensional assignment formulation. Even though this solution has been proven to be effective, it is computationally very expensive. One of the reasons is that in calculating the assignment cost of each possible candidate association one requires to find the maximum likelihood (ML) estimate of the unknown target state. The algorithms proposed in this paper use prior information of the targets that are being tracked to reduce the requirement for the costly ML estimation. The first algorithm is similar to the traditional two step technique except that it uses the predicted track information to avoid building the whole assignment tree in the measurement-to-measurement association. In particular, based on the predicted track information first validation gates are constructed for every target. Then, when forming the assignment tree, only the branches connecting measurements that satisfy the validation gate requirement are constructed. The second algorithm is a one-step algorithm in that it directly assigns the measurements to the tracks. We pose the data association problem as an (<i>S</i> + 1)-D assignment with the first dimension being the predicted state information of the tracks, and the rest of the S dimensions are the lists of measurements from the sensors. The costs of each possible (<i>S</i> + 1)-tuple are calculated based on the predicted track information, hence, the requirement for an ML estimate is eliminated. Further, we show that when the target maneuvers are not very high, and when the sensor measurements are uncorrelated the (<i>S</i>+1)-D assignment approximately decomposes into <i>S</i> individual 2-D assignments, resulting in huge computational savings.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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