Method

Joint Homography and Interacting Tracking [JHIT]


Submitted on 25 Jul. 2024 07:42 by
Paul Claasen (University of Pretoria)

Running time:0.01 s
Environment:1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (Python)

Method Description:
By modelling the camera projection matrix as part
of track state vectors, JHIT removes the explicit
influence of camera motion compensation techniques
on predicted track position states which is
prevalent in previous approaches. Expanding upon
this, static and dynamic camera motion models are
combined through the use of an IMM filter. A
simple bounding box motion model is used to
predict bounding box positions to incorporate
image plane information. JHIT dynamically mixes
bounding-box-based BIoU scores with ground-plane-
based Mahalanobis distances in an IMM-like fashion
to perform association. Finally, JHIT makes use of
dynamic process and measurement noise estimation
techniques.
Parameters:
\sigma_x=14.843421875000002, \sigma_y=16.249625,
\alpha_1=0.83375, \alpha_2=0.5, d_{conf}=0.5,
d_{high}=0.29999999999999993, \Omega=100.0, b=0.0,
\alpha_3=0.9065624999999999, p_{I,I}=0.9,
p_{G,G}=0.9, p_{s,s}=0.71625, p_{d,d}=0.71625
Latex Bibtex:
@misc{claasen2024interactingmultiplemodelbasedjoin
t,
title={Interacting Multiple Model-based
Joint Homography Matrix and Multiple Object State
Estimation},
author={Paul Johannes Claasen and Johan
Pieter de Villiers},
year={2024},
eprint={2409.02562},
archivePrefix={arXiv},
primaryClass={cs.CV},
url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.02562},
}

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 90.29 % 85.61 % 90.78 % 88.33 %
PEDESTRIAN 63.13 % 74.60 % 65.13 % 92.14 %

Benchmark recall precision F1 TP FP FN FAR #objects #trajectories
CAR 94.51 % 97.32 % 95.89 % 36985 1020 2150 9.17 % 47304 861
PEDESTRIAN 74.87 % 88.80 % 81.24 % 17481 2205 5867 19.82 % 24447 358

Benchmark MT PT ML IDS FRAG
CAR 84.77 % 12.00 % 3.23 % 168 251
PEDESTRIAN 45.02 % 35.74 % 19.24 % 463 964

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