MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409426678 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3560601

Sectoring Approach for Performance Enhancement of MTT and Its Application on JPDA Algorithm

2025· article· en· W4409426678 on OpenAlexaff
M. L. Cobankaya, A. El-Rouby

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advancements in multi-target tracking (MTT) technologies and algorithms have led to improved accuracy and efficiency in tracking multiple objects in dynamic environments. However, as the number of targets increases, MTT methods often struggle with computational demands and tracking capacity. This paper presents a novel sectoring approach on the Joint Probabilistic Data Association (JPDA) algorithm to enhance its tracking performance in MTT scenarios. The sectoring method divides the tracking area into distinct sectors and assigns a separate JPDA tracker for each sector, yielding two primary benefits in environments with large numbers of targets. First, it increases the capacity of the JPDA tracker to handle a larger number of targets. Second, it reduces computational complexity when tracking a high number of targets. On the other hand, the approach introduces a trade-off by slightly increasing computational complexity in scenarios with fewer targets. Experimental results were obtained through simulations of 10 different scenarios, each with 37 varying numbers of targets and three different sector configurations, amounting to a total of 1110 simulations. The findings demonstrate that the sectoring approach achieves up to a 95% reduction in computational complexity and increases the number of tracked targets from 24 to 40 in randomly generated scenarios. Results also revealed that the effects of the sectoring approach become more pronounced as the number of sectors increases.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207