MOT17 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 RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
AEb
1. using public detections
35.6
47.9
±13.6
47.018.1% 40.7% 15,828276,1792,082 (40.8)4,733 (92.7)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
AEb_O
2. online method using public detections
47.5
46.4
±13.9
44.916.5% 41.4% 17,030283,2652,266 (45.5)5,053 (101.5)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
AFN17
3. using public detections
32.0
51.5
±13.0
46.920.6% 35.5% 22,391248,4202,593 (46.3)4,308 (77.0)1.8Public
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.
AM_ADM17
4. online method using public detections
42.9
48.1
±13.8
52.113.4% 39.7% 25,061265,4952,214 (41.8)5,027 (94.9)5.7Public
S. Lee, M. Kim, S. Bae, Learning Discriminative Appearance Models for Online Multi-Object Tracking with Appearance Discriminability Measures, In IEEE Access, 2018.
AReid17
5. online method using public detections
28.1
51.4
±12.2
53.919.2% 32.3% 30,079241,3642,993 (52.3)6,373 (111.4)33.7Public
Anonymous submission
baitrack
6. using public detections
51.8
37.6
±19.4
20.321.0% 30.9% 99,085244,0018,808 (155.2)6,708 (118.2)6.4Public
Anonymous submission
BIG_HA
7. online method using public detections
57.1
-37.9
±24.1
0.00.0% 100.0% 213,867564,2280 (nan)0 (nan)887.9Public
Anonymous submission
BU_CV
8. online method using public detections
61.4
42.8
±14.4
32.315.8% 36.1% 40,573271,83810,118 (195.2)9,426 (181.9)17.8Public
Anonymous submission
CDT
9. using public detections
58.2
-64.5
±16.9
0.10.0% 99.4% 364,642563,67272 (730.7)64 (649.5)46.9Public
Anonymous submission
CEMT
10. using public detections
40.8
49.3
±12.6
44.416.8% 38.5% 21,711261,8082,696 (50.3)3,409 (63.6)5.8Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
CMT
11. using public detections
30.4
50.4
±13.0
58.217.8% 44.3% 25,443253,0961,267 (23.0)2,079 (37.7)10.2Public
Anonymous submission
COMOT
12. online method using public detections
45.8
46.4
±13.5
48.514.8% 42.2% 20,752279,8162,069 (41.0)4,606 (91.4)5.0Public
Anonymous submission
CRF_TRA
13. using public detections
25.5
53.1
±12.1
53.724.2% 30.7% 27,194234,9912,518 (43.2)4,918 (84.3)1.4Public
Anonymous submission
DCORV2
14. online method using public detections
54.2
45.5
±13.9
36.114.6% 40.4% 21,161282,9013,592 (72.0)7,696 (154.4)35.5Public
Anonymous submission
dcor
15. online method using public detections
57.7
45.0
±14.2
34.015.4% 38.2% 30,231275,2654,801 (93.7)8,498 (165.9)44.4Public
Anonymous submission
DeepMOTRPN
16. online method using public detections
49.5
48.1
±14.5
43.017.6% 38.6% 26,490262,5783,696 (69.1)5,353 (100.1)4.9Public
Anonymous submission
DeepMP17
17. using public detections
32.2
50.4
±13.1
52.318.8% 38.7% 22,535255,3561,868 (34.1)3,473 (63.4)7.4Public
DEEP_TAMA
18. online method using public detections
35.8
50.3
±13.3
53.519.2% 37.5% 25,479252,9962,192 (39.7)3,978 (72.1)1.5Public
for journal submission
DGCT
19. using public detections
22.8
54.5
±13.1
51.321.0% 35.4% 10,471243,1432,865 (50.3)4,889 (85.9)7.0Public
CJY, HYW, KHW @ HRI-SH
DH_TRK
20. using public detections
30.7
54.1
±13.0
49.221.6% 28.4% 36,196216,6705,918 (96.1)7,760 (126.0)1,775.7Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
DMAN
21. online method using public detections
41.8
48.2
±12.3
55.719.3% 38.3% 26,218263,6082,194 (41.2)5,378 (100.9)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.
DSA_MOT17
22. online method using public detections
47.3
45.0
±12.6
43.615.8% 39.2% 21,442286,4822,491 (50.6)3,824 (77.7)9.9Public
Anonymous submission
DTBasline
23. online method using public detections
31.9
51.1
±11.7
53.416.7% 35.5% 20,309253,2452,549 (46.2)5,910 (107.2)22.2Public
Anonymous submission
D_SST_V1
24. online method using public detections
66.2
42.7
±13.9
46.111.8% 44.4% 18,861298,9895,531 (117.7)13,775 (293.0)2.3Public
Anonymous submission
EAMTT
25. online method using public detections
63.2
42.6
±13.3
41.812.7% 42.7% 30,711288,4744,488 (91.8)5,720 (117.0)12.0Public
R. Sanchez-Matilla, F. Poiesi, A. Cavallaro. Online Multi-target Tracking with Strong and Weak Detections. In Computer Vision -- ECCV 2016 Workshops, 2016.
EDA_GNN
26. online method using public detections
53.8
45.5
±13.8
40.515.6% 40.6% 25,685277,6634,091 (80.5)5,579 (109.8)39.3Public
Paper ID 2713
EDMT17
27. using public detections
36.9
50.0
±13.9
51.321.6% 36.3% 32,279247,2972,264 (40.3)3,260 (58.0)0.6Public
J. Chen, H. Sheng, Y. Zhang, Z. Xiong. Enhancing Detection Model for Multiple Hypothesis Tracking. In BMTT-PETS CVPRw, 2017.
eHAF17
28. using public detections
29.6
51.8
±13.2
54.723.4% 37.9% 33,212236,7721,834 (31.6)2,739 (47.2)0.7Public
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.
eTC17
29. using public detections
29.0
51.9
±12.4
58.123.1% 35.5% 36,164232,7832,288 (38.9)3,071 (52.3)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.
FPSN
30. online method using public detections
57.3
44.9
±13.9
48.416.5% 35.8% 33,757269,9527,136 (136.8)14,491 (277.8)10.1Public
S. Lee, E. Kim. Multiple Object Tracking via Feature Pyramid Siamese Networks. In IEEE ACCESS, 2018.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
FWT
31. using public detections
36.3
51.3
±13.1
47.621.4% 35.2% 24,101247,9212,648 (47.2)4,279 (76.3)0.2Public
R. Henschel, L. Leal-Taixé, D. Cremers, B. Rosenhahn. Fusion of Head and Full-Body Detectors for Multi-Object Tracking. In Trajnet CVPRW, 2018.
GMPHD_DAL
32. online method using public detections
64.8
44.4
±13.9
36.214.9% 39.4% 19,170283,38011,137 (223.7)13,900 (279.3)3.5Public
Anonymous submission
GMPHD_KCF
33. online method using public detections
73.8
39.6
±13.6
36.68.8% 43.3% 50,903284,2285,811 (117.1)7,414 (149.4)3.3Public
T. Kutschbach, E. Bochinski, V. Eiselein, T. Sikora. Sequential Sensor Fusion Combining Probability Hypothesis Density and Kernelized Correlation Filters for Multi-Object Tracking in Video Data. In International Workshop on Traffic and Street Surveillance for Safety and Security at IEEE AVSS 2017, 2017.
GMPHD_N1Tr
34. online method using public detections
67.3
42.1
±13.5
33.911.9% 42.7% 18,214297,64610,698 (226.4)10,864 (229.9)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.
GM_PHD
35. online method using public detections
67.8
36.4
±14.1
33.94.1% 57.3% 23,723330,7674,607 (111.3)11,317 (273.5)38.4Public
V. Eiselein, D. Arp, M. Pätzold, T. Sikora. Real-time Multi-Human Tracking using a Probability Hypothesis Density Filter and multiple detectors. In 9th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Video and Signal-Based Surveillance, 2012.
GM_PHD
36. online method using public detections
66.5
42.1
±13.0
33.911.9% 42.7% 18,214297,64610,698 (226.4)10,864 (229.9)9.9Public
Anonymous submission
GM_PHD_D
37. online method using public detections
63.8
44.0
±13.8
34.214.8% 39.4% 19,135283,53013,556 (272.5)13,821 (277.8)9.9Public
Anonymous submission
GOTURN_3B
38. online method using public detections
60.8
44.3
±13.7
38.513.0% 43.2% 30,302279,1444,861 (96.2)5,277 (104.4)48.6Public
Anonymous submission
HAM_SADF17
39. online method using public detections
40.0
48.3
±13.2
51.117.1% 41.7% 20,967269,0381,871 (35.8)3,020 (57.7)5.0Public
Y. Yoon, A. Boragule, Y. Song, K. Yoon, M. Jeon. Online Multi-Object Tracking with Historical Appearance Matching and Scene Adaptive Detection Filtering. In IEEE AVSS, 2018.
HCC
40. using public detections
44.7
44.8
±11.2
46.818.3% 38.9% 17,586292,2941,555 (32.3)2,221 (46.1)0.9Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
HDTR
41. using public detections
22.3
54.1
±11.4
48.423.3% 34.8% 18,002238,8181,895 (32.9)2,693 (46.7)1.8Public
HIK_MOT17
42. using public detections
23.2
53.9
±13.7
54.323.7% 32.0% 27,656230,0422,386 (40.3)4,192 (70.8)5.4Public
hpmmt17
43. online method using public detections
29.3
51.2
±11.8
53.617.3% 34.9% 21,957250,8912,292 (41.3)6,108 (110.0)44,392.5Public
Anonymous submission
IDGA
44. using public detections
33.5
49.9
±12.2
50.322.1% 36.7% 37,060243,1482,426 (42.6)3,846 (67.6)59.2Public
Anonymous submission
IDOHMPT
45. online method using public detections
57.7
46.0
±13.1
44.116.8% 36.6% 30,873268,2215,768 (109.9)9,663 (184.2)8.1Public
Anonymous submission
IOU17
46. using public detections
55.7
45.5
±13.6
39.415.7% 40.5% 19,993281,6435,988 (119.6)7,404 (147.8)1,522.9Public
E. Bochinski, V. Eiselein, T. Sikora. High-Speed Tracking-by-Detection Without Using Image Information. In International Workshop on Traffic and Street Surveillance for Safety and Security at IEEE AVSS 2017, 2017.
IOUT_Re
47. online method using public detections
36.5
52.7
±13.0
43.320.1% 32.6% 16,529243,2266,946 (122.1)6,520 (114.6)7.0Public
Anonymous submission
ISDH_HDAv2
48. online method using public detections
29.4
54.5
±14.5
65.926.4% 32.1% 46,693207,0933,010 (47.6)6,000 (94.8)3.6Public
MM-008988/ IEEE Transactions on Multimedia
JBNOT
49. using public detections
34.2
52.6
±12.3
50.819.7% 35.8% 31,572232,6593,050 (51.9)3,792 (64.5)5.4Public
Anonymous submission
jCC
50. using public detections
31.7
51.2
±14.5
54.520.9% 37.0% 25,937247,8221,802 (32.1)2,984 (53.2)1.8Public
M. Keuper, S. Tang, B. Andres, T. Brox, B. Schiele. Motion Segmentation amp; Multiple Object Tracking by Correlation Co-Clustering. In IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2018.
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
LM_NN
51. using public detections
51.8
45.1
±13.3
43.214.8% 46.2% 10,834296,4512,286 (48.2)2,463 (51.9)2.5Public
NEUCOM-D-18-03230
LSST17
52. using public detections
29.6
54.7
±12.9
62.320.4% 40.1% 26,091228,4341,243 (20.9)3,726 (62.6)1.5Public
Multi-Object Tracking with Multiple Cues and Switcher-Aware Classification
LSST17O
53. online method using public detections
35.9
52.7
±13.3
57.917.9% 36.6% 22,512241,9362,167 (37.9)7,443 (130.3)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
L_SORT
54. using public detections
55.3
45.0
±14.0
46.012.2% 41.1% 19,967287,2293,294 (67.1)8,292 (168.9)102.6Public
Anonymous submission
MASS
55. online method using public detections new
54.1
46.9
±14.1
46.016.9% 36.3% 25,733269,1164,478 (85.6)11,994 (229.3)12.3Public
Anonymous submission
MHT_bLSTM
56. using public detections
45.1
47.5
±12.6
51.918.2% 41.7% 25,981268,0422,069 (39.4)3,124 (59.5)1.9Public
C. Kim, F. Li, J. Rehg. Multi-object Tracking with Neural Gating Using Bilinear LSTM. In ECCV, 2018.
MHT_DAM
57. using public detections
39.1
50.7
±13.7
47.220.8% 36.9% 22,875252,8892,314 (41.9)2,865 (51.9)0.9Public
C. Kim, F. Li, A. Ciptadi, J. Rehg. Multiple Hypothesis Tracking Revisited. In ICCV, 2015.
MOTbyReID
58. online method using public detections new
66.7
43.6
±13.7
37.117.6% 36.3% 35,725270,03612,347 (236.8)11,408 (218.8)2.5Public
Anonymous submission
MOTDT17
59. online method using public detections
35.3
50.9
±11.9
52.717.5% 35.7% 24,069250,7682,474 (44.5)5,317 (95.7)18.3Public
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.
MOT_BJ
60. online method using public detections
83.4
-7.3
±23.5
1.40.0% 99.1% 52,007548,5314,824 (1,734.0)8,621 (3,098.8)0.0Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
MOT_HY
61. using public detections new
47.1
42.9
±150.7
49.923.8% 23.3% 99,045218,6704,431 (72.3)9,108 (148.7)2.0Public
Anonymous submission
MOT_TBC
62. using public detections
33.3
53.9
±15.7
50.020.2% 36.7% 24,584232,6702,945 (50.1)4,612 (78.5)6.7Public
Anonymous submission
MOT_test
63. online method using public detections
33.3
51.6
±11.9
53.917.3% 35.5% 21,419249,0592,384 (42.7)5,613 (100.5)7.8Public
Anonymous submission
MTDF17
64. online method using public detections
52.8
49.6
±13.9
45.218.9% 33.1% 37,124241,7685,567 (97.4)9,260 (162.0)1.2Public
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.
NOTBD
65. using public detections
35.5
53.9
±12.7
51.221.5% 35.6% 28,912228,3562,964 (49.8)3,600 (60.5)0.3Public
Anonymous submission
NV_MC
66. using public detections
44.3
49.1
±13.9
45.719.0% 38.0% 16,850267,9232,446 (46.6)3,196 (60.9)0.3Public
Anonymous submission
ORCtracker
67. online method using public detections
45.2
50.7
±13.7
43.117.0% 35.2% 20,440249,7918,069 (144.8)11,188 (200.8)3,760.7Public
Anonymous submission
OST
68. using public detections
45.1
49.2
±14.3
47.618.6% 35.3% 21,844260,8714,022 (74.8)4,821 (89.7)1.7Public
Anonymous submission
overlap
69. using public detections
25.4
51.5
±13.1
55.623.0% 36.1% 38,322233,2751,860 (31.7)2,935 (50.0)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
PA_MOT17
70. online method using public detections
31.3
51.6
±13.5
53.518.9% 33.5% 28,794241,7042,635 (46.1)5,808 (101.6)710.3Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
PeriodMOT
71. online method using public detections
62.2
43.8
±13.2
40.914.7% 42.0% 21,941290,1944,910 (101.1)6,649 (136.9)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
PHD_GM
72. online method using public detections
47.1
48.8
±13.4
43.219.1% 35.2% 26,260257,9714,407 (81.2)6,448 (118.8)22.3Public
Anonymous submission
PHD_GSDL17
73. online method using public detections
49.9
48.0
±13.6
49.617.1% 35.6% 23,199265,9543,998 (75.6)8,886 (168.1)6.7Public
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.
PHD_LMP
74. online method using public detections
59.7
45.9
±13.1
42.515.5% 37.9% 27,946272,1964,977 (96.2)6,985 (135.0)29.4Public
Anonymous submission
PV
75. online method using public detections
36.2
52.8
±14.1
51.819.7% 34.0% 15,884246,9393,711 (66.0)8,757 (155.7)3.5Public
Anonymous submission
Qclc
76. online method using public detections
35.3
54.0
±14.3
47.723.3% 30.7% 22,374232,2124,748 (80.7)6,022 (102.3)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
QiMOT
77. online method using public detections
59.2
47.2
±13.1
40.815.5% 39.9% 18,907274,8284,320 (84.2)5,917 (115.4)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
Q_ls
78. online method using public detections
50.6
50.2
±14.4
43.619.7% 37.3% 23,143253,1514,414 (80.1)6,112 (110.9)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
ReDetPast
79. online method using public detections
68.3
44.3
±14.8
34.917.3% 36.7% 32,113271,34310,962 (211.2)11,733 (226.0)3.3Public
Anonymous submission
reID2track
80. online method using public detections
66.3
44.6
±14.3
39.915.8% 39.7% 22,451284,2136,134 (123.6)13,786 (277.8)9.0Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
REQT
81. online method using public detections
61.1
43.9
±14.2
47.413.1% 45.8% 34,309279,0302,986 (59.1)5,402 (106.9)64.1Public
Anonymous submission
RTac
82. online method using public detections
48.9
46.3
±14.6
49.218.9% 33.5% 43,447255,1584,196 (76.6)6,056 (110.6)14.1Public
Anonymous submission
RTRC
83. online method using public detections
48.6
48.5
±14.2
48.618.7% 35.7% 34,180252,8593,490 (63.2)6,304 (114.2)9.8Public
Anonymous submission
SAS_MOT17
84. using public detections
50.8
44.2
±12.2
57.216.1% 44.3% 29,473283,6111,529 (30.7)2,644 (53.2)4.8Public
Anonymous submission
SemiOMOT
85. using public detections
32.3
52.4
±15.0
51.022.6% 34.6% 23,660242,9532,070 (36.4)3,170 (55.7)0.7Public
Anonymous submission
SNM17
86. online method using public detections
63.6
46.8
±13.8
43.416.2% 37.1% 25,104271,0424,213 (81.1)9,891 (190.3)0.8Public
Anonymous submission
Sn_PBC
87. using public detections
36.2
51.3
±11.7
53.417.4% 35.2% 21,255251,2562,394 (43.2)6,148 (110.8)14.8Public
Anonymous submission
SRPN17
88. online method using public detections
40.1
51.0
±11.7
53.516.8% 35.1% 21,011252,8082,596 (47.0)5,981 (108.4)4.1Public
Anonymous submission
SSOMOT
89. online method using public detections
51.8
46.8
±13.1
49.215.3% 39.1% 24,041274,2572,121 (41.3)4,897 (95.3)4.9Public
Anonymous submission
STCG17
90. using public detections
30.7
51.1
±12.9
54.520.4% 38.6% 32,258241,9161,702 (29.8)2,483 (43.5)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
STDIC
91. online method using public detections
57.8
44.1
±13.6
45.913.2% 39.6% 46,126266,4492,992 (56.7)5,143 (97.4)17,757.0Public
Anonymous submission
TAR_1
92. online method using public detections
42.2
51.6
±11.9
41.421.7% 28.7% 33,514235,8593,629 (62.4)5,949 (102.2)5.6Public
Anonymous submission
TBD17_1
93. online method using public detections
35.9
51.4
±11.7
52.018.5% 33.2% 24,261247,1952,985 (53.1)6,611 (117.7)1,183.8Public
Anonymous submission
TBNMF17
94. online method using public detections
38.9
50.6
±12.6
49.318.9% 39.2% 17,522258,9902,014 (37.2)4,432 (81.9)6.9Public
Anonymous submission
TCF
95. online method using public detections
50.0
48.3
±13.6
48.718.9% 35.1% 36,274252,0923,530 (63.8)6,390 (115.5)6.4Public
Anonymous submission
TEM
96. using public detections
48.3
49.1
±12.6
45.417.0% 38.3% 22,119261,7973,439 (64.2)3,881 (72.4)8.2Public
Anonymous submission
Tensor17
97. online method using public detections
41.1
52.0
±12.0
48.719.1% 33.4% 14,138253,6163,072 (55.8)5,318 (96.6)0.0Public
P. Chu, H. Ling. FAMNet: Joint Learning of Feature, Affinity and Multi-dimensional Assignment for Online Multiple Object Tracking. In arXiv:1904.04989, 2019.
terry_T
98. online method using public detections
80.3
2.5
±6.9
12.10.4% 83.9% 96,372448,0055,756 (279.4)11,270 (547.1)34.7Public
Anonymous submission
TLMHT
99. using public detections
39.7
50.6
±12.5
56.517.6% 43.4% 22,213255,0301,407 (25.7)2,079 (37.9)2.6Public
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.
TM_track
100. online method using public detections
80.2
41.1
±14.9
32.813.2% 41.3% 27,606287,51117,408 (355.0)15,197 (309.9)2.5Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
TOPA
101. online method using public detections
32.5
51.8
±13.5
53.419.6% 33.1% 27,603241,5462,668 (46.7)5,790 (101.2)443.9Public
Anonymous submission
TPbase17
102. online method using public detections
62.6
43.3
±15.0
48.216.2% 36.6% 49,992265,8154,194 (79.3)12,103 (228.8)22.2Public
Anonymous submission
TPM
103. using public detections
29.2
54.2
±13.0
52.622.8% 37.5% 13,739242,7301,824 (32.0)2,472 (43.4)0.8Public
Anonymous submission
Tracktor17
104. online method using public detections
34.4
53.5
±14.5
52.319.5% 36.6% 12,201248,0472,072 (37.0)4,611 (82.3)1.5Public
Anonymous submission
ts_WCFMT
105. online method using public detections
49.3
48.4
±13.6
51.421.0% 32.5% 32,037255,4723,410 (62.3)6,351 (116.1)1.0Public
Anonymous submission
WCFMT17
106. using public detections
48.5
47.3
±16.0
52.321.9% 30.7% 43,253250,3023,556 (63.9)6,071 (109.1)1.0Public
Anonymous submission
XYHv2
107. online method using public detections
80.1
39.9
±12.4
23.89.9% 41.8% 29,713296,70412,900 (272.1)12,911 (272.3)7.8Public
Anonymous submission
YoloSort
108. online method using public detections
60.2
29.5
±24.1
41.715.0% 36.4% 154,747238,2414,888 (84.6)4,952 (85.7)14.4Public
Anonymous submission
yt_face
109. online method using public detections
31.9
52.6
±13.1
51.523.0% 35.9% 23,894241,4892,047 (35.8)2,827 (49.4)2.2Public
Anonymous submission
YT_T
110. online method using public detections
62.3
45.4
±13.4
40.316.0% 35.7% 25,425275,0507,652 (149.3)8,249 (160.9)11.4Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
ZM
111. online method using public detections
71.8
43.5
±13.9
32.614.5% 39.9% 25,083284,4059,197 (185.4)8,849 (178.4)14.4Public
Anonymous submission
zxbtk17
112. online method using public detections new
72.5
44.3
±15.0
29.618.5% 36.8% 33,024272,6498,422 (163.0)12,041 (233.0)1.7Public
Anonymous submission

Benchmark Statistics

SequencesFramesTrajectoriesBoxes
21177572355564228

Difficulty Analysis

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

MOT17-03-SDP

MOT17-03-SDP

(69.2% MOTA)

MOT17-03-FRCNN

MOT17-03-FRCNN

(55.9% MOTA)

MOT17-06-SDP

MOT17-06-SDP

(47.8% MOTA)

...

...

MOT17-14-DPM

MOT17-14-DPM

(18.0% MOTA)

MOT17-14-FRCNN

MOT17-14-FRCNN

(17.4% 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.