Consensus-Based Labeled Multi-Bernoulli Filter With Event-Triggered Communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces a novel consensus-based labeled multi-Bernoulli (LMB) filter to tackle multi-target tracking (MTT) in a communication resource-sensitive distributed sensor network (DSN). Although consensus-based approaches provide effective tools for distributed fusion and MTT, the requirement of iterative communication makes it impractical in resource limited situations. To deal with this issue, two event-triggered strategies are proposed and incorporated into the consensus-based LMB. Focusing on the information discrepancy between the local multi-target probability density function (PDF) and the time prediction of the latest broadcast one, the integral-triggering strategy (ITS) is introduced. Furthermore, by proving that the information discrepancy (Kullback-Leibler divergence) between two LMB densities with the same label space can be decomposed into the sum of the information discrepancy of each LMB component pair (LMB components with the same label), the separated-triggering strategy (STS) is proposed. The performance of the proposed algorithms is demonstrated in a distributed multi-target tracking scenario via numerical simulations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".