MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficient Parameter Based Online Object Tracking

2021· article· en· W3201592903 on OpenAlexaff
Md. Hafizur Rahman, Samr Ali, Nizar Bouguila

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)HistogramDiscriminative modelVideo trackingComputer scienceDirichlet distributionMixture modelLatent Dirichlet allocationComputer visionFeature (linguistics)Representation (politics)Object (grammar)Generative modelMathematicsImage (mathematics)Topic modelGenerative grammar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional object tracking approaches solve the problem as a supervised learning task. Due to variations in video frames over time, the appearance model of the object is updated for each video frame. Using density or mixture based model to represent target object is a common technique in Bayesian approaches. However, in histogram based representation where the data is proportional, Gaussian distribution is not the proper choice. In this paper, we propose a framework for feature representation on the simplex manifold for proportional data utilizing the histogram representation of the target object in initial frame. Extracted density features are concatenated with histogram based features to get a better representation of the target object. A set of parameter vectors determine the appearance features of the target object in the subsequent frames. To precisely model proportional data, we employ five appropriate distributions; namely, Dirichlet, Generalized Dirichlet, Scaled Dirichlet, Beta-Liouville and Inverted Dirichlet distributions. We present experimental results to show that the proposed method, which incorporates both generative and discriminative features, has an improved tracking performance.

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 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 score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207