Estimation of 3D facial dynamics with nonlinear filters for position tracking*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a comparative evaluation of three nonlinear state estimation filters, the Extended Kalman Filter (EKF), Unscented Kalman Filter (UKF), and Particle Filter (PF), for the task of 3D facial landmark tracking. Using a publicly available dataset, we assess each filter's performance under both deterministic (noise-free) and stochastic (noisy) conditions. Metrics such as mean squared error (MSE), convergence rates of state and covariance estimates, and consistency over time are used to quantify tracking performance. Results show that the EKF consistently outperforms the UKF and PF, achieving faster convergence and lower estimation error, particularly in scenarios characterized by mild nonlinearity. Heatmap analyses under varying noise conditions further highlight the EKF's robustness and accuracy, especially in low-noise regimes, while PF performance deteriorates with increased process noise. Our findings suggest that while UKF and PF offer advantages in highly nonlinear or non-Gaussian environments, the EKF provides the best trade-off between computational efficiency and estimation accuracy for the facial tracking task studied in mild nonlinearity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".