Method

PolarMOT: How Far Can Geometric Relations Take Us in 3D Multi-Object Tracking? [PolarMOT]
https://polarmot.github.io/

Submitted on 12 Dec. 2021 02:16 by
Aleksandr Kim (Technical University of Munich)

Running time:0.02 s
Environment:1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)

Method Description:
State-of-the-art generalizable multi-object tracking as edge classification on a continuously evolved temporal multiplex graph, which contains only pairwise geometric relationships between objects (temporal and spatial) as its initial edge features.

We encode 3D detections as nodes in a graph, where spatial and temporal pairwise relations among objects are encoded via localized polar coordinates on graph edges. This representation makes our geometric relations invariant to global transformations and smooth trajectory changes, especially under non-holonomic motion. This allows our graph neural network to learn to effectively encode temporal and spatial interactions and fully leverage contextual and motion cues to obtain final scene interpretation by posing data association as edge classification. We establish a new state-of-the-art on nuScenes and show that PolarMOT generalizes remarkably well across different locations (Boston, Singapore) and datasets (nuScenes and KITTI).
Parameters:
See paper
Latex Bibtex:
@inproceedings{polarmot,
author = {Aleksandr Kim and Guillem Bras{'o} and Aljo\v{s}a O\v{s}ep and Laura Leal-Taix{'e}},
title = {PolarMOT: How Far Can Geometric Relations Take Us in 3D Multi-Object Tracking?},
booktitle = {European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV)},
year = {2022},
}

Detailed Results

From all 29 test sequences, our benchmark computes the commonly used tracking metrics CLEARMOT, MT/PT/ML, identity switches, and fragmentations [1,2]. The tables below show all of these metrics.


Benchmark MOTA MOTP MODA MODP
CAR 85.31 % 85.52 % 86.49 % 88.57 %
PEDESTRIAN 47.25 % 64.87 % 48.29 % 88.92 %

Benchmark recall precision F1 TP FP FN FAR #objects #trajectories
CAR 92.67 % 94.40 % 93.53 % 33554 1990 2655 17.89 % 42674 1686
PEDESTRIAN 63.58 % 80.99 % 71.24 % 14823 3480 8491 31.28 % 21750 1407

Benchmark MT PT ML IDS FRAG
CAR 81.38 % 16.31 % 2.31 % 408 900
PEDESTRIAN 30.24 % 51.20 % 18.56 % 241 1375

This table as LaTeX


[1] K. Bernardin, R. Stiefelhagen: Evaluating Multiple Object Tracking Performance: The CLEAR MOT Metrics. JIVP 2008.
[2] Y. Li, C. Huang, R. Nevatia: Learning to associate: HybridBoosted multi-target tracker for crowded scene. CVPR 2009.


eXTReMe Tracker