Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate object tracking is a challenging problem due to numerous factors, that may cause the tracker to drift away from the target object. Typically, the output of a tracker is a bounding box (BB); such BB may not well discriminate the object from its background and may not be centered correctly around the object. This paper proposes a method that first detects, at each frame, if a tracker tends to drift by analyzing saliency features of the output BB of a tracker, and then applies automatic seeded object segmentation on the BB to correct the drift once detected. Such segmentation is meant to relocate (recenter) the BB adaptive to the object segmented. As seeds, we propose to use SIFT and salient points conditioned they are non-background pixels. Different than related work, our approach thus models drift external to a base tracker by examining its output BB at each and corrects drift, as needed, by updating that BB adaptive to segmentation. We show the ability of the proposed method to significantly improve the tracking quality of base trackers. We also show that the proposed method outperforms by far segmentation-based trackers.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".