ECCV 2014: Computer Vision – ECCV 2014 pp 155-171 | Cite as
Tracking Using Multilevel Quantizations
Abstract
Most object tracking methods only exploit a single quantization of an image space: pixels, superpixels, or bounding boxes, each of which has advantages and disadvantages. It is highly unlikely that a common optimal quantization level, suitable for tracking all objects in all environments, exists. We therefore propose a hierarchical appearance representation model for tracking, based on a graphical model that exploits shared information across multiple quantization levels. The tracker aims to find the most possible position of the target by jointly classifying the pixels and superpixels and obtaining the best configuration across all levels. The motion of the bounding box is taken into consideration, while Online Random Forests are used to provide pixel- and superpixel-level quantizations and progressively updated on-the-fly. By appropriately considering the multilevel quantizations, our tracker exhibits not only excellent performance in non-rigid object deformation handling, but also its robustness to occlusions. A quantitative evaluation is conducted on two benchmark datasets: a non-rigid object tracking dataset (11 sequences) and the CVPR2013 tracking benchmark (50 sequences). Experimental results show that our tracker overcomes various tracking challenges and is superior to a number of other popular tracking methods.
Keywords
Tracking Multilevel Quantizations Online Random Forests Non-rigid Object Tracking Conditional Random FieldsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Achanta, R., Shaji, A., Smith, K., Lucchi, A., Fua, P., Susstrunk, S.: SLIC superpixels compared to state-of-the-art superpixel methods. TPAMI 34(11), 2274–2282 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 2.Adam, A., Rivlin, E., Shimshoni, I.: Robust fragments-based tracking using the integral histogram. In: CVPR, pp. 798–805 (2006)Google Scholar
- 3.Aeschliman, C., Park, J., Kak, A.C.: A probabilistic framework for joint segmentation and tracking. In: CVPR, pp. 1371–1378 (2010)Google Scholar
- 4.Avidan, S.: Ensemble tracking. TPAMI 29(2), 261–271 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Babenko, B., Yang, M., Belongie, S.: Robust object tracking with online multiple instance learning. TPAMI 33(8), 1619–1632 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Bosch, A., Zisserman, A., Muoz, X.: Image classification using random forests and ferns. In: ICCV, pp. 1–8 (2007)Google Scholar
- 7.Boykov, Y., Funka-Lea, G.: Graph cuts and efficient nd image segmentation. IJCV 70(2), 109–131 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Boykov, Y., Kolmogorov, V.: An experimental comparison of min-cut/max-flow algorithms for energy minimization in vision. TPAMI 26(9), 1124–1137 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Breiman, L.: Random forests. Machine Learning 45(1), 5–32 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 10.Brunelli, R.: Template matching techniques in computer vision: theory and practice. John Wiley & Sons (2009)Google Scholar
- 11.Chockalingam, P., Pradeep, N., Birchfield, S.: Adaptive fragments-based tracking of non-rigid objects using level sets. In: ICCV, pp. 1530–1537 (2009)Google Scholar
- 12.Collins, R., Liu, Y., Leordeanu, M.: Online selection of discriminative tracking features. TPAMI 27(10), 1631–1643 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Dinh, T.B., Vo, N., Medioni, G.: Context tracker: Exploring supporters and distracters in unconstrained environments. In: CVPR, pp. 1177–1184 (2011)Google Scholar
- 14.Duffner, S., Garcia, C.: Pixeltrack: a fast adaptive algorithm for tracking non-rigid objects. In: ICCV, pp. 2480–2487 (2013)Google Scholar
- 15.Godec, M., Roth, P.M., Bischof, H.: Hough-based tracking of non-rigid objects. In: ICCV, pp. 81–88 (2011)Google Scholar
- 16.Grabner, H., Bischof, H.: On-line boosting and vision. In: CVPR, pp. 260–267 (2006)Google Scholar
- 17.Hare, S., Saffari, A., Torr, P.H.: Struck: Structured output tracking with kernels. In: ICCV, pp. 263–270 (2011)Google Scholar
- 18.He, X., Zemel, R.S., Carreira-Perpiñán, M.Á.: Multiscale conditional random fields for image labeling. In: CVPR, pp. 695–702 (2004)Google Scholar
- 19.Henriques, J.F., Caseiro, R., Martins, P., Batista, J.: Exploiting the circulant structure of tracking-by-detection with kernels. In: Fitzgibbon, A., Lazebnik, S., Perona, P., Sato, Y., Schmid, C. (eds.) ECCV 2012, Part IV. LNCS, vol. 7575, pp. 702–715. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Hong, Z., Mei, X., Prokhorov, D., Tao, D.: Tracking via robust multi-task multi-view joint sparse representation. In: ICCV, pp. 649–656 (2013)Google Scholar
- 21.Hong, Z., Mei, X., Tao, D.: Dual-force metric learning for robust distracter-resistant tracker. In: Fitzgibbon, A., Lazebnik, S., Perona, P., Sato, Y., Schmid, C. (eds.) ECCV 2012, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7572, pp. 513–527. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Huang, Q., Han, M., Wu, B., Ioffe, S.: A hierarchical conditional random field model for labeling and segmenting images of street scenes. In: CVPR, pp. 1953–1960 (2011)Google Scholar
- 23.Jia, X., Lu, H., Yang, M.H.: Visual tracking via adaptive structural local sparse appearance model. In: CVPR, pp. 1822–1829 (2012)Google Scholar
- 24.Kalal, Z., Mikolajczyk, K., Matas, J.: Forward-backward error: Automatic detection of tracking failures. In: ICPR, pp. 2756–2759 (2010)Google Scholar
- 25.Kalal, Z., Mikolajczyk, K., Matas, J.: Tracking-learning-detection. TPAMI 34(7), 1409–1422 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Kohli, P., Rihan, J., Bray, M., Torr, P.H.: Simultaneous segmentation and pose estimation of humans using dynamic graph cuts. IJCV 79(3), 285–298 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Kohli, P., Torr, P.H.: Dynamic graph cuts for efficient inference in markov random fields. TPAMI 29(12), 2079–2088 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Kwon, J., Lee, K.M.: Tracking of a non-rigid object via patch-based dynamic appearance modeling and adaptive basin hopping monte carlo sampling. In: CVPR, pp. 1208–1215 (2009)Google Scholar
- 29.Kwon, J., Lee, K.M.: Visual tracking decomposition. In: CVPR, pp. 1269–1276 (2010)Google Scholar
- 30.Kwon, J., Lee, K.M.: Tracking by sampling trackers. In: ICCV, pp. 1195–1202 (2011)Google Scholar
- 31.Ladicky, L., Russell, C., Kohli, P., Torr, P.H.: Associative hierarchical crfs for object class image segmentation. In: ICCV, pp. 739–746 (2009)Google Scholar
- 32.Ladický, Ľ., Sturgess, P., Alahari, K., Russell, C., Torr, P.H.S.: What, where and how many? Combining object detectors and CRFs. In: Daniilidis, K., Maragos, P., Paragios, N. (eds.) ECCV 2010, Part IV. LNCS, vol. 6314, pp. 424–437. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Lagarias, J.C., Reeds, J.A., Wright, M.H., Wright, P.E.: Convergence properties of the nelder–mead simplex method in low dimensions. SIAM Journal on Optimization 9(1), 112–147 (1998)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 34.Learned-Miller, E., Sevilla-Lara, L.: Distribution fields for tracking. In: CVPR, pp. 1910–1917 (2012)Google Scholar
- 35.Lepetit, V., Fua, P.: Keypoint recognition using randomized trees. TPAMI 28(9), 1465–1479 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Leung, T., Malik, J.: Representing and recognizing the visual appearance of materials using three-dimensional textons. IJCV 43(1), 29–44 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 37.Levinshtein, A., Sminchisescu, C., Dickinson, S.: Optimal contour closure by superpixel grouping. In: Daniilidis, K., Maragos, P., Paragios, N. (eds.) ECCV 2010, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6312, pp. 480–493. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Li, H., Shen, C., Shi, Q.: Real-time visual tracking using compressive sensing. In: CVPR, pp. 1305–1312 (2011)Google Scholar
- 39.Li, X., Hu, W., Shen, C., Zhang, Z., Dick, A., Hengel, A.V.D.: A survey of appearance models in visual object tracking. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 4(4) (2013)Google Scholar
- 40.Liu, B., Huang, J., Yang, L., Kulikowsk, C.: Robust tracking using local sparse appearance model and k-selection. In: CVPR, pp. 1313–1320 (2011)Google Scholar
- 41.Mei, X., Ling, H.: Robust visual tracking and vehicle classification via sparse representation. TPAMI 33(11), 2259–2272 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Mei, X., Ling, H., Wu, Y., Blasch, E., Bai, L.: Efficient minimum error bounded particle resampling L1 tracker with occlusion detection. TIP 22(7), 2661–2675 (2013)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 43.Ojala, T., Pietikainen, M., Maenpaa, T.: Multiresolution gray-scale and rotation invariant texture classification with local binary patterns. TPAMI 24(7), 971–987 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.Oron, S., Bar-Hillel, A., Levi, D., Avidan, S.: Locally orderless tracking. In: CVPR, pp. 1940–1947 (2012)Google Scholar
- 45.Pérez, P., Hue, C., Vermaak, J., Gangnet, M.: Color-based probabilistic tracking. In: Heyden, A., Sparr, G., Nielsen, M., Johansen, P. (eds.) ECCV 2002, Part I. LNCS, vol. 2350, pp. 661–675. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 46.Ross, D., Lim, J., Lin, R., Yang, M.: Incremental learning for robust visual tracking. IJCV 77(1), 125–141 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.Rother, C., Kolmogorov, V., Blake, A.: Grabcut: Interactive foreground extraction using iterated graph cuts. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 23(3), 309–314 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 48.Saffari, A., Leistner, C., Santner, J., Godec, M., Bischof, H.: On-line random forests. In: ICCV Workshops, pp. 1393–1400 (2009)Google Scholar
- 49.Santner, J., Leistner, C., Saffari, A., Pock, T., Bischof, H.: Prost: Parallel robust online simple tracking. In: CVPR, pp. 723–730 (2010)Google Scholar
- 50.Wang, C., Komodakis, N., Paragios, N.: Markov random field modeling, inference & learning in computer vision & image understanding: A survey. CVIU 117(11), 1610–1627 (2013)Google Scholar
- 51.Wang, C., de La Gorce, M., Paragios, N.: Segmentation, ordering and multi-object tracking using graphical models. In: ICCV, pp. 747–754 (2009)Google Scholar
- 52.Wang, S., Lu, H., Yang, F., Yang, M.H.: Superpixel tracking. In: ICCV, pp. 1323–1330 (2011)Google Scholar
- 53.Wojek, C., Schiele, B.: A dynamic conditional random field model for joint labeling of object and scene classes. In: Forsyth, D., Torr, P., Zisserman, A. (eds.) ECCV 2008, Part IV. LNCS, vol. 5305, pp. 733–747. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 54.Wu, Y., Lim, J., Yang, M.H.: Online object tracking: A benchmark. In: CVPR, pp. 2411–2418 (2013)Google Scholar
- 55.Yang, H., Shao, L., Zheng, F., Wang, L., Song, Z.: Recent advances and trends in visual tracking: A review. Neurocomputing 74(18), 3823–3831 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 56.Zhang, T., Ghanem, B., Liu, S., Ahuja, N.: Robust visual tracking via multi-task sparse learning. In: CVPR, pp. 2042–2049 (2012)Google Scholar
- 57.Zhong, W., Lu, H., Yang, M.H.: Robust object tracking via sparsity-based collaborative model. In: CVPR, pp. 1838–1845 (2012)Google Scholar