我的新追踪器真的比你的好吗?

Luka Cehovin, M. Kristan, A. Leonardis
{"title":"我的新追踪器真的比你的好吗?","authors":"Luka Cehovin, M. Kristan, A. Leonardis","doi":"10.1109/WACV.2014.6836055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The problem of visual tracking evaluation is sporting an abundance of performance measures, which are used by various authors, and largely suffers from lack of consensus about which measures should be preferred. This is hampering the cross-paper tracker comparison and faster advancement of the field. In this paper we provide an overview of the popular measures and performance visualizations and their critical theoretical and experimental analysis. We show that several measures are equivalent from the point of information they provide for tracker comparison and, crucially, that some are more brittle than the others. Based on our analysis we narrow down the set of potential measures to only two complementary ones that can be intuitively interpreted and visualized, thus pushing towards homogenization of the tracker evaluation methodology.","PeriodicalId":73325,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision","volume":"15 1","pages":"540-547"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"93","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is my new tracker really better than yours?\",\"authors\":\"Luka Cehovin, M. Kristan, A. Leonardis\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/WACV.2014.6836055\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The problem of visual tracking evaluation is sporting an abundance of performance measures, which are used by various authors, and largely suffers from lack of consensus about which measures should be preferred. This is hampering the cross-paper tracker comparison and faster advancement of the field. In this paper we provide an overview of the popular measures and performance visualizations and their critical theoretical and experimental analysis. We show that several measures are equivalent from the point of information they provide for tracker comparison and, crucially, that some are more brittle than the others. Based on our analysis we narrow down the set of potential measures to only two complementary ones that can be intuitively interpreted and visualized, thus pushing towards homogenization of the tracker evaluation methodology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":73325,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"540-547\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-03-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"93\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/WACV.2014.6836055\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/WACV.2014.6836055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 93

摘要

视觉跟踪评估的问题是各种作者使用的大量性能度量,并且在很大程度上缺乏对哪种度量应该首选的共识。这阻碍了跨论文跟踪器的比较和该领域的更快发展。在本文中,我们概述了流行的测量和性能可视化及其关键的理论和实验分析。我们表明,从它们为跟踪器比较提供的信息的角度来看,有几个度量是等效的,而且至关重要的是,有些度量比其他度量更脆弱。根据我们的分析,我们将一组潜在的措施缩小到只有两个互补的措施,可以直观地解释和可视化,从而推动跟踪器评估方法的同质化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is my new tracker really better than yours?
The problem of visual tracking evaluation is sporting an abundance of performance measures, which are used by various authors, and largely suffers from lack of consensus about which measures should be preferred. This is hampering the cross-paper tracker comparison and faster advancement of the field. In this paper we provide an overview of the popular measures and performance visualizations and their critical theoretical and experimental analysis. We show that several measures are equivalent from the point of information they provide for tracker comparison and, crucially, that some are more brittle than the others. Based on our analysis we narrow down the set of potential measures to only two complementary ones that can be intuitively interpreted and visualized, thus pushing towards homogenization of the tracker evaluation methodology.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信