MOT16 Results

Click on a measure to sort the table accordingly. See below for a more detailed description.


Showing only entries that use public detections!

TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
DS_v2
1. using public detections
18.9
59.3
±12.9
57.524.2% 29.1% 7,46565,810887 (13.9)2,738 (42.8)39.4Public
Anonymous submission
MTT_TPR
2. using public detections
24.8
54.9
±11.7
53.118.7% 34.8% 4,13076,6731,447 (25.0)3,693 (63.7)6.7Public
Anonymous submission
HDTR
3. using public detections
18.3
53.6
±8.7
46.621.2% 37.0% 4,71479,353618 (10.9)833 (14.7)3.6Public
TAR
4. online method using public detections
35.3
49.4
±8.1
40.018.4% 30.6% 11,22079,8391,180 (21.0)2,052 (36.5)5.0Public
Anonymous submission
AFN
5. using public detections
27.2
49.0
±10.2
48.219.1% 35.7% 9,50882,506899 (16.4)1,383 (25.3)0.6Public
H. Shen, L. Huang, C. Huang, W. Xu. Tracklet Association Tracker: An End-to-End Learning-based Association Approach for Multi-Object Tracking. In CoRR, 2018.
RTT
6. online method using public detections
35.5
50.0
±8.0
39.517.3% 34.0% 7,06182,9001,152 (21.1)2,237 (41.0)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
eHAF16
7. using public detections
28.5
47.2
±16.8
52.418.6% 42.8% 12,58683,107542 (10.0)787 (14.5)0.5Public
H. Sheng, Y. Zhang, J. Chen, Z. Xiong, J. Zhang. Heterogeneous Association Graph Fusion for Target Association in Multiple Object Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2018.
AOReid
8. online method using public detections
26.3
48.2
±8.7
50.815.3% 36.8% 10,28383,301821 (15.1)1,963 (36.1)11.2Public
Anonymous submission
NOTA
9. using public detections
21.9
49.8
±8.3
55.317.9% 37.7% 7,24883,614614 (11.3)1,372 (25.3)19.2Public
Anonymous submission
eTC
10. using public detections
24.7
49.2
±9.1
56.117.3% 40.3% 8,40083,702606 (11.2)882 (16.3)0.7Public
G. Wang, Y. Wang, H. Zhang, R. Gu, J. Hwang. Exploit the Connectivity: Multi-Object Tracking with TrackletNet. In arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.07258, 2018.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
CRF_RNN16
11. using public detections
22.9
49.0
±7.2
53.918.1% 35.8% 8,49583,838621 (11.5)1,252 (23.2)1.3Public
Anonymous submission
MEN
12. online method using public detections
26.9
50.0
±9.1
52.815.0% 37.0% 6,11784,271706 (13.1)1,797 (33.4)2.0Public
Anonymous submission
DAST
13. online method using public detections new
29.3
48.2
±8.3
50.714.1% 37.2% 8,86984,784838 (15.7)2,028 (37.9)8.7Public
Anonymous submission
LSST16O
14. online method using public detections
31.5
49.2
±10.2
56.513.4% 41.4% 7,18784,875606 (11.3)2,497 (46.7)2.0Public
Anonymous submission
MTDF
15. online method using public detections
45.0
45.7
±11.2
40.114.1% 36.4% 12,01884,9701,987 (37.2)3,377 (63.2)1.5Public
Z. Fu, F. Angelini, J. Chambers, S. Naqvi. Multi-Level Cooperative Fusion of GM-PHD Filters for Online Multiple Human Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2019.
STCG
16. using public detections
22.9
49.3
±8.6
52.016.2% 41.4% 6,88684,979515 (9.6)775 (14.5)22.3Public
Anonymous submission
TSN
17. using public detections
33.0
48.2
±8.7
45.719.9% 38.9% 8,44785,315665 (12.5)829 (15.6)0.8Public
Anonymous submission
siameseCos
18. using public detections new
26.7
49.4
±8.4
49.819.1% 39.4% 6,28185,384679 (12.8)823 (15.5)0.8Public
In preparation
MOTDT
19. online method using public detections
31.8
47.6
±8.2
50.915.2% 38.3% 9,25385,431792 (14.9)1,858 (35.0)20.6Public
C. Long, A. Haizhou, Z. Zijie, S. Chong. Real-time Multiple People Tracking with Deeply Learned Candidate Selection and Person Re-identification. In ICME, 2018.
FWT
20. using public detections
34.0
47.8
±9.4
44.319.1% 38.2% 8,88685,487852 (16.0)1,534 (28.9)0.6Public
R. Henschel, L. Leal-Taixé, D. Cremers, B. Rosenhahn. Fusion of Head and Full-Body Detectors for Multi-Object Tracking. In Trajnet CVPRW, 2018.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
TPM
21. using public detections
24.1
51.3
±9.3
47.918.7% 40.8% 2,70185,504569 (10.7)707 (13.3)0.8Public
Anonymous submission
INTERA_MOT
22. using public detections
30.3
45.4
±8.6
47.718.1% 38.7% 13,40785,547600 (11.3)930 (17.5)4.3Public
L. Lan, X. Wang, S. Zhang, D. Tao, W. Gao, T. Huang. Interacting Tracklets for Multi-object Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 2018.
SRPN16
23. online method using public detections
35.8
48.2
±8.5
51.314.2% 36.8% 7,76785,973790 (14.9)2,006 (38.0)1.4Public
Anonymous submission
PDetTracId
24. online method using public detections
33.3
49.7
±9.4
46.816.7% 37.3% 4,39386,2411,040 (19.7)3,652 (69.3)2.4Public
Anonymous submission
LMP
25. using public detections
24.7
48.8
±9.8
51.318.2% 40.1% 6,65486,245481 (9.1)595 (11.3)0.5Public
S. Tang, M. Andriluka, B. Andres, B. Schiele. Multiple People Tracking with Lifted Multicut and Person Re-identification. In CVPR, 2017.
CMT16
26. using public detections
21.3
48.1
±9.0
56.615.7% 46.2% 7,75886,501381 (7.2)615 (11.7)6.3Public
Anonymous submission
TLMHT
27. using public detections
26.8
48.7
±8.6
55.315.7% 44.5% 6,63286,504413 (7.9)642 (12.2)4.8Public
H. Sheng, J. Chen, Y. Zhang, W. Ke, Z. Xiong, J. Yu. Iterative Multiple Hypothesis Tracking with Tracklet-level Association. In IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2018.
KCF16
28. online method using public detections
33.1
48.8
±9.6
47.215.8% 38.1% 5,87586,567906 (17.3)1,116 (21.2)0.1Public
P. Chu, H. Fan, C. Tan, H. Ling. Online Multi-Object Tracking with Instance-Aware Tracker and Dynamic Model Refreshment. In WACV, 2019.
JCSTD
29. online method using public detections
37.6
47.4
±8.3
41.114.4% 36.4% 8,07686,6381,266 (24.1)2,697 (51.4)8.8Public
W. Tian, M. Lauer, L. Chen. Online Multi-Object Tracking Using Joint Domain Information in Traffic Scenarios. In IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2019.
PV
30. online method using public detections
30.9
50.4
±10.1
50.814.9% 38.9% 2,60086,7801,061 (20.2)3,181 (60.7)7.3Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
HCC
31. using public detections
21.1
49.3
±10.2
50.717.8% 39.9% 5,33386,795391 (7.5)535 (10.2)0.8Public
L. Ma, S. Tang, M. Black, L. Gool. Customized Multi-Person Tracker. In Computer Vision -- ACCV 2018, 2018.
EAGS16
32. using public detections
24.6
47.4
±10.4
50.117.3% 42.7% 8,36986,931575 (11.0)913 (17.5)197.3Public
H. Sheng, X. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Y. Wu, J. Chen. Enhanced Association with Supervoxels in Multiple Hypothesis Tracking. In IEEE Access, 2018.
NOMT
33. using public detections
26.3
46.4
±9.9
53.318.3% 41.4% 9,75387,565359 (6.9)504 (9.7)2.6Public
W. Choi. Near-Online Multi-target Tracking with Aggregated Local Flow Descriptor. In ICCV, 2015.
EDMT
34. using public detections
32.4
45.3
±9.1
47.917.0% 39.9% 11,12287,890639 (12.3)946 (18.3)1.8Public
J. Chen, H. Sheng, Y. Zhang, Z. Xiong. Enhancing Detection Model for Multiple Hypothesis Tracking. In BMTT-PETS CVPRw, 2017.
GCRA
35. using public detections
31.0
48.2
±8.3
48.612.9% 41.1% 5,10488,586821 (16.0)1,117 (21.7)2.8Public
C. Ma, C. Yang, F. Yang, Y. Zhuang, Z. Zhang, H. Jia, X. Xie. Trajectory Factory: Tracklet Cleaving and Re-connection by Deep Siamese Bi-GRU for Multiple Object Tracking. In ICME, 2018.
DeepMP16
36. using public detections
21.9
48.7
±10.3
50.115.0% 43.6% 4,11188,862535 (10.4)873 (17.0)9.9Public
Anonymous submission
NLLMPa
37. using public detections
27.1
47.6
±10.6
47.317.0% 40.4% 5,84489,093629 (12.3)768 (15.0)8.3Public
E. Levinkov, J. Uhrig, S. Tang, M. Omran, E. Insafutdinov, A. Kirillov, C. Rother, T. Brox, B. Schiele, B. Andres. Joint Graph Decomposition and Node Labeling: Problem, Algorithms, Applications. In CVPR, 2017.
MCjoint
38. using public detections
27.8
47.1
±10.8
52.320.4% 46.9% 6,70389,368370 (7.3)598 (11.7)0.6Public
}@article{DBLP:journals/corr/KeuperTYABS16, author = {Margret Keuper and Siyu Tang and Zhongjie Yu and Bjoern Andres and Thomas Brox and Bernt Schiele}, title = {A Multi-cut Formulation for Joint Segmentation and Tracking of Multiple Objects}, journal = {CoRR}, volume = {abs/1607.06317}, year = {2016}, url = {http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.06317}, timestamp = {Wed, 07 Jun 2017 14:41:31 +0200}, biburl = {http://dblp.uni-trier.de/rec/bib/journals/corr/KeuperTYABS16}, bibsource = {dblp computer science bibliography, http://dblp.org} }
DMMOT
39. online method using public detections
32.1
46.1
±11.1
54.817.4% 42.7% 7,90989,874532 (10.5)1,616 (31.9)0.3Public
J. Zhu, H. Yang, N. Liu, M. Kim, W. Zhang, M. Yang. Online Multi-Object Tracking with Dual Matching Attention Networks. In ECCV, 2018.
ASTT
40. using public detections
29.1
47.2
±9.6
44.316.3% 41.6% 4,68090,877633 (12.6)814 (16.2)0.5Public
Yi Tao el al., “Adaptive Spatio-temporal Model Based Multiple Object Tracking Considering a Moving Camera[C]”, International Conference on Universal Village (UV), 2018.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
JMC
41. using public detections
33.1
46.3
±9.0
46.315.5% 39.7% 6,37390,914657 (13.1)1,114 (22.2)0.8Public
S. Tang, B. Andres, M. Andriluka, B. Schiele. Multi-Person Tracking by Multicuts and Deep Matching. In BMTT, 2016.
TripBFT
42. online method using public detections
30.5
48.3
±8.1
50.915.4% 40.1% 2,70691,047543 (10.8)896 (17.9)0.5Public
Anonymous submission
STAM16
43. online method using public detections
40.2
46.0
±9.1
50.014.6% 43.6% 6,89591,117473 (9.5)1,422 (28.4)0.2Public
Q. Chu, W. Ouyang, H. Li, X. Wang, B. Liu, N. Yu. Online Multi-object Tracking Using CNN-Based Single Object Tracker with Spatial-Temporal Attention Mechanism. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2017.
RAR16pub
44. online method using public detections
41.0
45.9
±9.7
48.813.2% 41.9% 6,87191,173648 (13.0)1,992 (39.8)0.9Public
K. Fang, Y. Xiang, X. Li, S. Savarese. Recurrent Autoregressive Networks for Online Multi-Object Tracking. In The IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), 2018.
TripT
45. online method using public detections
31.3
48.1
±8.5
51.915.8% 40.2% 2,82791,210563 (11.3)1,143 (22.9)0.6Public
Anonymous submission
MHT_DAM
46. using public detections
34.2
45.8
±8.9
46.116.2% 43.2% 6,41291,758590 (11.9)781 (15.7)0.8Public
C. Kim, F. Li, A. Ciptadi, J. Rehg. Multiple Hypothesis Tracking Revisited. In ICCV, 2015.
deepS2
47. using public detections
31.4
46.0
±8.2
46.515.5% 42.6% 5,12492,697693 (14.1)759 (15.4)0.7Public
ID 32
AMIR
48. online method using public detections
32.2
47.2
±7.7
46.314.0% 41.6% 2,68192,856774 (15.8)1,675 (34.1)1.0Public
A. Sadeghian, A. Alahi, S. Savarese. Tracking The Untrackable: Learning To Track Multiple Cues with Long-Term Dependencies. In ICCV, 2017.
MHT_bLSTM6
49. using public detections
42.8
42.1
±9.7
47.814.9% 44.4% 11,63793,172753 (15.4)1,156 (23.6)1.8Public
C. Kim, F. Li, J. Rehg. Multi-object Tracking with Neural Gating Using Bilinear LSTM. In ECCV, 2018.
CSAHD
50. online method using public detections
40.6
43.7
±11.6
45.710.5% 46.1% 8,31893,273984 (20.1)2,164 (44.3)23.2Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
DCCRF16
51. online method using public detections
41.6
44.8
±9.8
39.714.1% 42.3% 5,61394,133968 (20.0)1,378 (28.5)0.1Public
H. Zhou, W. Ouyang, J. Cheng, X. Wang, H. Li. Deep Continuous Conditional Random Fields with Asymmetric Inter-object Constraints for Online Multi-object Tracking. In IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2018.
TBNMF16
52. online method using public detections
36.3
45.6
±8.9
46.013.4% 43.5% 4,23094,435584 (12.1)1,229 (25.5)7.9Public
Anonymous submission
QuadMOT16
53. using public detections
42.2
44.1
±9.4
38.314.6% 44.9% 6,38894,775745 (15.5)1,096 (22.8)1.8Public
J. Son, M. Baek, M. Cho, B. Han. Multi-Object Tracking with Quadruplet Convolutional Neural Networks. In CVPR, 2017.
CDA_DDALv2
54. online method using public detections
41.1
43.9
±7.8
45.110.7% 44.4% 6,45095,175676 (14.1)1,795 (37.6)0.5Public
S. Bae and K. Yoon, Confidence-Based Data Association and Discriminative Deep Appearance Learning for Robust Online Multi-Object Tracking , In IEEE TPAMI, 2017.
LFNF16
55. using public detections
43.8
43.6
±11.0
41.613.3% 45.7% 6,61695,363836 (17.5)938 (19.7)0.6Public
Sheng H, Hao L, Chen J, et al. Robust Local Effective Matching Model for Multi-Target Tracking. In PCM, 2017
TBSS
56. online method using public detections
42.8
44.6
±9.3
42.612.3% 43.9% 4,13696,128790 (16.7)1,419 (30.0)3.0Public
X. Zhou, P. Jiang, Z. Wei, H. Dong, F. Wang. Online Multi-Object Tracking with Structural Invariance Constraint. In BMVC, 2018.
oICF
57. online method using public detections
42.3
43.2
±10.2
49.311.3% 48.5% 6,65196,515381 (8.1)1,404 (29.8)0.4Public
H. Kieritz, S. Becker, W. Hübner, M. Arens. Online Multi-Person Tracking using Integral Channel Features. In IEEE Advanced Video and Signal-based Surveillance (AVSS) 2016, 2016.
PMPTracker
58. online method using public detections
49.1
40.3
±11.7
38.210.4% 42.0% 10,07197,5241,343 (28.9)2,764 (59.4)148.0Public
Light version of PTZ camera Mutiple People Tracker
LINF1
59. using public detections
40.4
41.0
±9.5
45.711.6% 51.3% 7,89699,224430 (9.4)963 (21.1)4.2Public
L. Fagot-Bouquet, R. Audigier, Y. Dhome, F. Lerasle. Improving Multi-Frame Data Association with Sparse Representations for Robust Near-Online Multi-Object Tracking. In ECCV, 2016.
PHD_GSDL16
60. online method using public detections
46.8
41.0
±8.9
43.111.3% 41.5% 6,49899,2571,810 (39.7)3,650 (80.1)8.3Public
Z. Fu, P. Feng, F. Angelini, J. Chambers, S. Naqvi. Particle PHD Filter based Multiple Human Tracking using Online Group-Structured Dictionary Learning. In IEEE Access, 2018.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
OVBT
61. online method using public detections
58.5
38.4
±8.8
37.87.5% 47.3% 11,51799,4631,321 (29.1)2,140 (47.1)0.3Public
Y. Ban, S. Ba, X. Alameda-Pineda, R. Horaud. Tracking Multiple Persons Based on a Variational Bayesian Model. In BMTT 2016, .
AM_ADM
62. online method using public detections
43.7
40.1
±10.1
43.87.1% 46.2% 8,50399,891789 (17.5)1,736 (38.4)5.8Public
S. Lee, M. Kim, S. Bae, Learning Discriminative Appearance Models for Online Multi-Object Tracking with Appearance Discriminability Measures, In IEEE Access, 2018.
TST_PLS
63. online method using public detections
51.8
39.7
±11.1
43.36.7% 47.4% 8,447100,728783 (17.5)1,730 (38.7)4.0Public
Anonymous submission
LTTSC-CRF
64. using public detections
49.3
37.6
±9.9
42.19.6% 55.2% 11,969101,343481 (10.8)1,012 (22.8)0.6Public
N. Le, A. Heili, M. Odobez. Long-Term Time-Sensitive Costs for CRF-Based Tracking by Detection. In ECCVw, 2016.
EAMTT_pub
65. online method using public detections
45.1
38.8
±8.5
42.47.9% 49.1% 8,114102,452965 (22.0)1,657 (37.8)11.8Public
R. Sanchez-Matilla, F. Poiesi, A. Cavallaro "Multi-target tracking with strong and weak detections" in BMTT ECCVw 2016
GMMCP
66. using public detections
50.8
38.1
±7.8
35.58.6% 50.9% 6,607105,315937 (22.2)1,669 (39.5)0.5Public
A. Dehghan, S. Assari, M. Shah.. GMMCP-Tracker:Globally Optimal Generalized Maximum Multi Clique Problem for Multiple Object Tracking. In CVPR, 2015.
HAM_ACT16
67. online method using public detections
39.4
38.1
±8.2
43.37.8% 54.4% 6,976105,434418 (9.9)707 (16.8)8.0Public
YT16
68. online method using public detections
51.7
37.8
±8.8
31.18.8% 46.1% 4,384106,3652,655 (63.7)2,750 (66.0)12.1Public
Anonymous submission
GCK
69. online method using public detections
56.7
28.7
±8.5
30.63.4% 51.0% 21,436106,4242,217 (53.3)3,277 (78.7)25.1Public
Anonymous submission
SMOT
70. using public detections
67.9
29.7
±7.3
0.05.3% 47.7% 17,426107,5523,108 (75.8)4,483 (109.3)0.2Public
C. Dicle, O. Camps, M. Sznaier. The Way They Move: Tracking Targets with Similar Appearance. In ICCV, 2013.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
D_cost16
71. online method using public detections
38.0
39.9
±9.1
35.38.7% 50.2% 1,133107,586790 (19.3)824 (20.1)8.5Public
Anonymous submission
HISP_T
72. online method using public detections
52.6
35.9
±8.5
28.97.8% 50.1% 6,412107,9182,594 (63.6)2,298 (56.3)4.8Public
N. Baisa. Online Multi-target Visual Tracking using a HISP Filter. In Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Applications - Volume 5: VISAPP,, 2018.
HISP_T2
73. online method using public detections
50.3
37.2
±8.6
29.77.6% 50.7% 3,323108,8592,370 (58.8)2,234 (55.4)4.8Public
Anonymous submission
RNN_A_P
74. online method using public detections
57.3
34.0
±8.6
33.77.9% 51.0% 8,562109,2692,479 (61.9)3,393 (84.7)19.7Public
Anonymous submission
LP2D
75. using public detections
45.1
35.7
±10.1
34.28.7% 50.7% 5,084111,163915 (23.4)1,264 (32.4)49.3Public
MOT baseline: Linear programming on 2D image coordinates.
DRT
76. online method using public detections
44.5
34.7
±11.4
41.16.3% 61.8% 6,992111,617460 (11.9)1,127 (29.1)6.2Public
Anonymous submission
GM_PHD_DAL
77. online method using public detections
53.7
35.1
±9.1
26.67.0% 51.4% 2,350111,8864,047 (104.8)5,338 (138.2)3.5Public
Anonymous submission
GM_PHD_Dl
78. online method using public detections
54.7
34.3
±9.1
20.57.1% 51.5% 2,350111,8865,605 (145.1)5,357 (138.7)3.5Public
Anonymous submission
JCmin_MOT
79. online method using public detections
41.9
36.7
±9.1
36.27.5% 54.4% 2,936111,890667 (17.3)831 (21.5)14.8Public
M. Abhijeet Boragule. Joint Cost Minimization for Multi-Object Tracking. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Vide and Signale Based Surveillance, 2017.
TBD
80. using public detections
60.4
33.7
±9.2
0.07.2% 54.2% 5,804112,5872,418 (63.2)2,252 (58.9)1.3Public
A. Geiger, M. Lauer, C. Wojek, C. Stiller, R. Urtasun. 3D Traffic Scene Understanding from Movable Platforms. In Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI), 2014.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFP FNID Sw.FragHzDetector
cm_test
81. online method using public detections
43.6
35.4
±20.2
40.36.5% 71.4% 4,427112,889402 (10.6)1,176 (30.9)1.6Public
Anonymous submission
TDP
82. online method using public detections
49.3
33.9
±10.2
40.46.2% 62.2% 6,709113,249480 (12.7)1,105 (29.2)9.7Public
Anonymous submission
CEM
83. using public detections
49.1
33.2
±7.9
0.07.8% 54.4% 6,837114,322642 (17.2)731 (19.6)0.3Public
A. Milan, S. Roth, K. Schindler. Continuous Energy Minimization for Multitarget Tracking. In IEEE TPAMI, 2014.
GM_PHD_e17
84. online method using public detections
55.6
33.8
±8.9
25.36.3% 54.9% 1,766115,1303,778 (102.5)3,874 (105.1)3.3Public
Anonymous submission
GM_PHD_N1T
85. online method using public detections
53.6
33.3
±8.9
25.55.5% 56.0% 1,750116,4523,499 (96.8)3,594 (99.5)9.9Public
N. Baisa, A. Wallace. Development of a N-type GM-PHD filter for multiple target, multiple type visual tracking. In Journal of Visual Communication and Image Representation, 2019.
CppSORT
86. online method using public detections
49.3
31.5
±9.0
27.74.3% 59.9% 3,048120,2781,587 (46.6)2,239 (65.8)687.1Public
S. Murray. Real-Time Multiple Object Tracking - A Study on the Importance of Speed. In arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.03572, 2017.
GMPHD_HDA
87. online method using public detections
43.6
30.5
±6.9
33.44.6% 59.7% 5,169120,970539 (16.0)731 (21.7)13.6Public
Y. Song, M. Jeon. Online Multiple Object Tracking with the Hierarchically Adopted GM-PHD Filter using Motion and Appearance. In IEEE/IEIE The International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE) Asia, 2016.
DCOR
88. online method using public detections
49.5
28.3
±9.0
21.73.4% 63.9% 1,618128,345849 (28.7)2,592 (87.5)32.9Public
Anonymous submission
JPDA_m
89. using public detections
43.8
26.2
±6.1
0.04.1% 67.5% 3,689130,549365 (12.9)638 (22.5)22.2Public
H. Rezatofighi, A. Milan, Z. Zhang, Q. Shi, A. Dick, I. Reid. Joint Probabilistic Data Association Revisited. In ICCV, 2015.
DP_NMS
90. using public detections
42.2
26.2
±9.3
31.24.1% 67.5% 3,689130,557365 (12.9)638 (22.5)5.9Public
H. Pirsiavash, D. Ramanan, C. Fowlkes. Globally-Optimal Greedy Algorithms for Tracking a Variable Number of Objects. In CVPR, 2011.

Due to a minor bug in the export script, all results were re-evaluated on April 11, 2016. Here is the old snapshot of the leaderboard.


Benchmark Statistics

SequencesFramesTrajectoriesBoxes
75919759182326

Difficulty Analysis

Sequence difficulty (from easiest to hardest, measured by average MOTA)

MOT16-03

MOT16-03

(53.0% MOTA)

MOT16-06

MOT16-06

(44.3% MOTA)

MOT16-07

MOT16-07

(38.0% MOTA)

...

...

MOT16-08

MOT16-08

(29.8% MOTA)

MOT16-14

MOT16-14

(24.1% MOTA)


Evaluation Measures

Lower is better. Higher is better.
Measure Better Perfect Description
Avg Rank lower 1 This is the rank of each tracker averaged over all present evaluation measures.
MOTA higher 100 % Multiple Object Tracking Accuracy [1]. This measure combines three error sources: false positives, missed targets and identity switches.
MOTP higher 100 % Multiple Object Tracking Precision [1]. The misalignment between the annotated and the predicted bounding boxes.
IDF1 higher 100 % ID F1 Score [2]. The ratio of correctly identified detections over the average number of ground-truth and computed detections.
FAF lower 0 The average number of false alarms per frame.
MT higher 100 % Mostly tracked targets. The ratio of ground-truth trajectories that are covered by a track hypothesis for at least 80% of their respective life span.
ML lower 0 % Mostly lost targets. The ratio of ground-truth trajectories that are covered by a track hypothesis for at most 20% of their respective life span.
FP lower 0 The total number of false positives.
FN lower 0 The total number of false negatives (missed targets).
ID Sw. lower 0 The total number of identity switches. Please note that we follow the stricter definition of identity switches as described in [3].
Frag lower 0 The total number of times a trajectory is fragmented (i.e. interrupted during tracking).
Hz higher Inf. Processing speed (in frames per second excluding the detector) on the benchmark.

Legend

Symbol Description
online method This is an online (causal) method, i.e. the solution is immediately available with each incoming frame and cannot be changed at any later time.
using public detections This method used the provided detection set as input.
new This entry has been submitted or updated less than a week ago.

References:


[1] Bernardin, K. & Stiefelhagen, R. Evaluating Multiple Object Tracking Performance: The CLEAR MOT Metrics. Image and Video Processing, 2008(1):1-10, 2008.
[2] Ristani, E., Solera, F., Zou, R., Cucchiara, R. & Tomasi, C. Performance Measures and a Data Set for Multi-Target, Multi-Camera Tracking. In ECCV workshop on Benchmarking Multi-Target Tracking, 2016.
[3] Li, Y., Huang, C. & Nevatia, R. Learning to associate: HybridBoosted multi-target tracker for crowded scene. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2009.