2012
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-5860-5_107
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Cost Effective Method for Matching the 3D Motion Trajectories

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Two trajectories are compared with a modified continuous dynamic time warping algorithm. A similar idea, but with the addition of elbow points to be the feature for representing trajectories was later proposed in [22], and for trajectory comparison, the aforementioned LCSS was adopted.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two trajectories are compared with a modified continuous dynamic time warping algorithm. A similar idea, but with the addition of elbow points to be the feature for representing trajectories was later proposed in [22], and for trajectory comparison, the aforementioned LCSS was adopted.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If there is no shift, the simple rigid 3D registration problem (5) is recovered. Remark that methods based on rotation invariant shape signatures/features (as curvature or torsion for example) [25,26,27] or rotation invariant metrics [28] are not considered here since they do not make the estimation of the rotation matrix. Moreover, they match a 3D curve with an other, and not a 3D curve with a linear combination of 3D patterns.…”
Section: D Matchingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So, despite the lack of a guaranteed experimenting conclusion, relying on an extensive analysis [4], a comparison between developed algorithm and the classical DTW is considered sufficient. From Hidden Markov Models [5] and 'elbow' reductions [6] to kernel-based representations [7], there are various ways of handling trajectory analysis tasks but none of these are covariance-based except [8], where covariance matrices are instrumented to develop DTW rather than extracting explicit vector set descriptions. So, in terms of feature formation, that is, deduction of fixed-dimensional vectors from ordered vector sets, literature is still lacking in covariance-based analysis; especially when it comes to shrunk models.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%