A Co-inference Approach to Robust Visual Tracking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Proc. of IEEE Int'l Conf. on Computer Vision, Vancouver, Canada, 2001 Visual tracking could be treated as a parameter estimation problem of target representation based on observations in image sequences. A richer target representation would incur better chances of successful tracking in cluttered and dynamic environments. However, the dimensionality of target's state space also increases making tracking a formidable estimation problem. In this paper, the problem of tracking and integrating multiple cues is formulated in a probabilistic framework and represented by a factorized graphical model. Structured variational analysis of such graphical model factorizes di#erent modalities and suggests a co-inference process among these modalities. A sequential Monte Carlo algorithm is proposed to give an e#cient approximation of the co-inference based on the importance sampling technique. This algorithm is implemented in real-time at around 30Hz. Specifically, tracking both position, shape and color distribution of a target is investigated in this paper. Our extensive experiments show that the proposed algorithm performs robustly in a large variety of tracking scenarios. The approach presented in this paper has the potential to solve other sensor fusion problems. 1
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 | 0.001 | 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".