2020
DOI: 10.1109/lra.2020.2969183
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Track to Reconstruct and Reconstruct to Track

Abstract: Object tracking and 3D reconstruction are often performed together, with tracking used as input for reconstruction. However, the obtained reconstructions also provide useful information for improving tracking. We propose a novel method that closes this loop, first tracking to reconstruct, and then reconstructing to track. Our approach, MOTSFusion (Multi-Object Tracking, Segmentation and dynamic object Fusion), exploits the 3D motion extracted from dynamic object reconstructions to track objects through long pe… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
67
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 115 publications
(67 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
67
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This became the CLEAR MOT metrics (Bernardin and Stiefelhagen 2008) which positions the MOTA metric as the main metric for tracking evaluation alongside other metrics such as MOTP. MOTA was adopted for evaluation in the PETS workshop series (Ellis and Ferryman 2010) and remains, to this day, the most commonly used metric for evaluating MOT algorithms, although it has often been highly criticised (Shitrit et al 2011;Bento and Zhu 2016;Leichter and Krupka 2013;Leal-Taixé et al 2017;Milan et al 2013;Ristani et al 2016;Dave et al 2020;Luiten et al 2020;Maksai and Fua 2019;Wang et al 2019;Maksai et al 2017;Yu et al 2016;Dendorfer et al 2020;Luo et al 2014) for its bias toward overemphasizing detection over association (see Fig. 1), as well as a number of other issues (see Sect.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This became the CLEAR MOT metrics (Bernardin and Stiefelhagen 2008) which positions the MOTA metric as the main metric for tracking evaluation alongside other metrics such as MOTP. MOTA was adopted for evaluation in the PETS workshop series (Ellis and Ferryman 2010) and remains, to this day, the most commonly used metric for evaluating MOT algorithms, although it has often been highly criticised (Shitrit et al 2011;Bento and Zhu 2016;Leichter and Krupka 2013;Leal-Taixé et al 2017;Milan et al 2013;Ristani et al 2016;Dave et al 2020;Luiten et al 2020;Maksai and Fua 2019;Wang et al 2019;Maksai et al 2017;Yu et al 2016;Dendorfer et al 2020;Luo et al 2014) for its bias toward overemphasizing detection over association (see Fig. 1), as well as a number of other issues (see Sect.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another deep learning approach which targets a similar problem is MOTSFusion (Luiten et al, 2019). This method aims to identify and separate cars, both still and moving.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [102], the authors proposed an object tracking and 3D reconstruction method to perform 3D object motion estimation. Object tracking and 3D reconstruction are often performed together, with tracking used as input for the 3D reconstruction.…”
Section: Tracking For Vehicle Reidmentioning
confidence: 99%