A Deep Dive into Generic Object Tracking: A Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generic object tracking remains an important yet challenging task in computer vision due to complex spatio-temporal dynamics, especially in the presence of occlusions, similar distractors, and appearance variations. Over the past two decades, a wide range of tracking paradigms, including Siamese-based trackers, discriminative trackers, and, more recently, prominent transformer-based approaches, have been introduced to address these challenges. While a few existing survey papers in this field have either concentrated on a single category or widely covered multiple ones to capture progress, our paper presents a comprehensive review of all three categories, with particular emphasis on the rapidly evolving transformer-based methods. We analyze the core design principles, innovations, and limitations of each approach through both qualitative and quantitative comparisons. Our study introduces a novel categorization and offers a unified visual and tabular comparison of representative methods. Additionally, we organize existing trackers from multiple perspectives and summarize the major evaluation benchmarks, highlighting the fast-paced advancements in transformer-based tracking driven by their robust spatio-temporal modeling capabilities.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".