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
30.9
48.1
±13.4
46.017.7% 39.5% 16,839273,8192,350 (45.7)5,275 (102.5)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
AEb_Exp_4
2. using public detections
44.3
38.6
±16.8
39.314.8% 46.4% 16,841327,2172,206 (52.5)6,959 (165.7)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
AEb_Exp_6
3. using public detections new
31.3
48.1
±13.5
45.918.1% 39.5% 17,371273,1172,352 (45.6)4,994 (96.8)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
AFN17
4. using public detections
27.6
51.5
±13.0
46.920.6% 35.5% 22,391248,4202,593 (46.3)4,308 (77.0)1.8Public
Paper ID 4411
AM_ADM17
5. online method using public detections
36.1
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.
BIG_HA
6. online method using public detections
47.1
-37.9
±24.1
0.00.0% 100.0% 213,867564,2280 (nan)0 (nan)887.9Public
Anonymous submission
BnW
7. online method using public detections
26.3
52.5
±15.3
52.618.7% 36.7% 19,192245,7652,822 (50.0)5,610 (99.4)2.5Public
Anonymous submission
BU_CV
8. online method using public detections
52.1
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
48.3
-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
34.9
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
18.8
52.0
±13.2
54.823.3% 37.7% 31,660237,5471,827 (31.6)2,738 (47.3)10.2Public
Anonymous submission
COMOT
12. online method using public detections
38.8
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
21.0
53.1
±12.1
53.724.2% 30.7% 27,194234,9912,518 (43.2)4,918 (84.3)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
dcor
14. online method using public detections
49.8
45.0
±14.2
34.015.4% 38.2% 30,231275,2654,801 (93.7)8,498 (165.9)44.4Public
Anonymous submission
DEEP_TAMA
15. online method using public detections
29.7
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
16. using public detections
19.8
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
17. using public detections
26.3
54.1
±13.0
49.221.6% 28.4% 36,196216,6705,918 (96.1)7,760 (126.0)1,775.7Public
Anonymous submission
DMAN
18. online method using public detections
34.8
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
19. online method using public detections
40.3
45.0
±12.6
43.615.8% 39.2% 21,442286,4822,491 (50.6)3,824 (77.7)9.9Public
Anonymous submission
DTBasline
20. online method using public detections
27.2
51.1
±11.7
53.416.7% 35.5% 20,309253,2452,549 (46.2)5,910 (107.2)22.2Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
EAMTT
21. online method using public detections
53.1
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
22. online method using public detections
45.8
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
23. using public detections
31.3
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
24. using public detections
24.8
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
25. using public detections
24.3
51.9
±12.8
58.023.5% 35.5% 37,311231,6582,294 (38.9)2,917 (49.5)0.7Public
Anonymous submission
FPSN
26. online method using public detections
48.9
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.
FWT
27. using public detections
31.2
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_KCF
28. online method using public detections
61.8
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.
GM_PHD
29. online method using public detections
57.1
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
30. online method using public detections
56.1
42.1
±13.0
33.911.9% 42.7% 18,214297,64610,698 (226.4)10,864 (229.9)9.9Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
HAM_SADF17
31. online method using public detections
33.5
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
32. using public detections
37.0
44.8
±11.2
46.818.3% 38.9% 17,586292,2941,555 (32.3)2,221 (46.1)0.9Public
Anonymous submission
HDTR
33. using public detections
18.7
54.1
±11.4
48.423.3% 34.8% 18,002238,8181,895 (32.9)2,693 (46.7)1.8Public
HIK_MOT17
34. using public detections
19.6
53.9
±13.7
54.323.7% 32.0% 27,656230,0422,386 (40.3)4,192 (70.8)5.4Public
hpmmt17
35. online method using public detections
24.2
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
36. using public detections
28.6
49.9
±12.2
50.322.1% 36.7% 37,060243,1482,426 (42.6)3,846 (67.6)59.2Public
Anonymous submission
IDOHMPT
37. online method using public detections
48.8
46.0
±13.1
44.116.8% 36.6% 30,873268,2215,768 (109.9)9,663 (184.2)8.1Public
Anonymous submission
IOU17
38. using public detections
47.4
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
39. online method using public detections
30.7
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
40. online method using public detections
25.1
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
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
jCC
41. using public detections
26.3
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.
LM_NN
42. using public detections
43.3
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
43. using public detections
24.8
54.7
±12.9
62.320.4% 40.1% 26,091228,4341,243 (20.9)3,726 (62.6)1.5Public
Anonymous submission
LSST17O
44. online method using public detections
29.7
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
45. using public detections
46.8
45.0
±14.0
46.012.2% 41.1% 19,967287,2293,294 (67.1)8,292 (168.9)102.6Public
Anonymous submission
MHT_bLSTM
46. using public detections
37.6
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
47. using public detections
32.7
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.
MOTDT17
48. online method using public detections
29.9
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
49. online method using public detections
39.5
50.4
±12.3
51.018.2% 34.1% 30,911245,8313,296 (58.4)6,279 (111.3)0.0Public
Anonymous submission
MOT_test
50. online method using public detections
27.7
51.6
±11.9
53.917.3% 35.5% 21,419249,0592,384 (42.7)5,613 (100.5)7.8Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
MTDF17
51. online method using public detections
43.8
49.6
±13.9
45.218.9% 33.1% 37,124241,7685,567 (97.4)9,260 (162.0)1.2Public
Anonymous submission
NOTBD
52. using public detections
30.4
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
53. using public detections
37.1
49.1
±13.9
45.719.0% 38.0% 16,850267,9232,446 (46.6)3,196 (60.9)0.3Public
Anonymous submission
ORCtracker
54. online method using public detections
38.3
50.7
±13.7
43.117.0% 35.2% 20,440249,7918,069 (144.8)11,188 (200.8)3,760.7Public
Anonymous submission
PA_MOT17
55. online method using public detections
26.0
51.6
±13.5
53.518.9% 33.5% 28,794241,7042,635 (46.1)5,808 (101.6)710.3Public
Anonymous submission
PeriodMOT
56. online method using public detections
52.2
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
57. online method using public detections
39.9
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
58. online method using public detections
42.4
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
59. online method using public detections
50.8
45.9
±13.1
42.515.5% 37.9% 27,946272,1964,977 (96.2)6,985 (135.0)29.4Public
Anonymous submission
PV
60. online method using public detections
43.0
48.5
±14.5
48.618.2% 34.9% 27,889258,6894,173 (77.1)8,661 (159.9)3.5Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
Qclc
61. online method using public detections
29.9
54.0
±14.3
47.723.3% 30.7% 22,374232,2124,748 (80.7)6,022 (102.3)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
QiMOT
62. online method using public detections
50.1
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
63. online method using public detections
42.5
50.2
±14.4
43.619.7% 37.3% 23,143253,1514,414 (80.1)6,112 (110.9)1.8Public
Anonymous submission
ReDetPast
64. online method using public detections
57.1
44.3
±14.8
34.917.3% 36.7% 32,113271,34310,962 (211.2)11,733 (226.0)3.3Public
Anonymous submission
reID2track
65. online method using public detections
55.8
44.6
±14.3
39.915.8% 39.7% 22,451284,2136,134 (123.6)13,786 (277.8)9.0Public
Anonymous submission
REQT
66. online method using public detections
51.7
43.9
±14.2
47.413.1% 45.8% 34,309279,0302,986 (59.1)5,402 (106.9)64.1Public
Anonymous submission
RTac
67. online method using public detections
41.4
46.3
±14.6
49.218.9% 33.5% 43,447255,1584,196 (76.6)6,056 (110.6)14.1Public
Anonymous submission
RTRC
68. online method using public detections
41.4
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
69. using public detections
42.0
44.2
±12.2
57.216.1% 44.3% 29,473283,6111,529 (30.7)2,644 (53.2)4.8Public
Anonymous submission
SemiOMOT
70. using public detections
26.8
52.4
±15.0
51.022.6% 34.6% 23,660242,9532,070 (36.4)3,170 (55.7)0.7Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
SNM17
71. online method using public detections
53.7
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
72. using public detections
30.8
51.3
±11.7
53.417.4% 35.2% 21,255251,2562,394 (43.2)6,148 (110.8)14.8Public
Anonymous submission
SRPN17
73. online method using public detections
33.8
51.0
±11.7
53.516.8% 35.1% 21,011252,8082,596 (47.0)5,981 (108.4)4.1Public
Anonymous submission
SSOMOT
74. online method using public detections
43.5
46.8
±13.1
49.215.3% 39.1% 24,041274,2572,121 (41.3)4,897 (95.3)4.9Public
Anonymous submission
STDIC
75. online method using public detections
49.0
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
76. online method using public detections
35.8
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
77. online method using public detections
30.5
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
78. online method using public detections
32.5
50.6
±12.6
49.318.9% 39.2% 17,522258,9902,014 (37.2)4,432 (81.9)6.9Public
Anonymous submission
TCF
79. online method using public detections
42.4
48.3
±13.6
48.718.9% 35.1% 36,274252,0923,530 (63.8)6,390 (115.5)6.4Public
Anonymous submission
TEM
80. using public detections
41.2
49.1
±12.6
45.417.0% 38.3% 22,119261,7973,439 (64.2)3,881 (72.4)8.2Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
terry_T
81. online method using public detections
67.1
2.5
±6.9
12.10.4% 83.9% 96,372448,0055,756 (279.4)11,270 (547.1)34.7Public
Anonymous submission
TLMHT
82. using public detections
32.8
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
83. online method using public detections
66.3
41.1
±14.9
32.813.2% 41.3% 27,606287,51117,408 (355.0)15,197 (309.9)2.5Public
Anonymous submission
TOPA
84. online method using public detections
27.3
51.8
±13.5
53.419.6% 33.1% 27,603241,5462,668 (46.7)5,790 (101.2)443.9Public
Anonymous submission
TPbase17
85. online method using public detections
53.0
43.3
±15.0
48.216.2% 36.6% 49,992265,8154,194 (79.3)12,103 (228.8)22.2Public
Anonymous submission
TPM
86. using public detections
24.2
54.2
±13.0
52.622.8% 37.5% 13,739242,7301,824 (32.0)2,472 (43.4)0.8Public
Anonymous submission
ts_WCFMT
87. online method using public detections
41.8
48.4
±13.6
51.421.0% 32.5% 32,037255,4723,410 (62.3)6,351 (116.1)1.0Public
Anonymous submission
WCFMT17
88. using public detections
41.3
47.3
±16.0
52.321.9% 30.7% 43,253250,3023,556 (63.9)6,071 (109.1)1.0Public
Anonymous submission
XYHv2
89. online method using public detections
64.3
39.9
±12.4
23.89.9% 41.8% 29,713296,70412,900 (272.1)12,911 (272.3)66.9Public
Anonymous submission
yt_face
90. online method using public detections
26.6
52.6
±13.1
51.523.0% 35.9% 23,894241,4892,047 (35.8)2,827 (49.4)2.2Public
Anonymous submission
TrackerAvg RankMOTAIDF1MTMLFPFNID Sw.FragHzDetector
YT_T
91. online method using public detections
53.3
45.4
±13.4
40.316.0% 35.7% 25,425275,0507,652 (149.3)8,249 (160.9)11.4Public
Anonymous submission
ZM
92. online method using public detections
60.3
43.5
±13.9
32.614.5% 39.9% 25,083284,4059,197 (185.4)8,849 (178.4)14.4Public
Anonymous submission

Benchmark Statistics

SequencesFramesTrajectoriesBoxes
21177572355564228

Difficulty Analysis

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

MOT17-03-SDP

MOT17-03-SDP

(69.8% MOTA)

MOT17-03-FRCNN

MOT17-03-FRCNN

(56.4% MOTA)

MOT17-06-SDP

MOT17-06-SDP

(49.9% MOTA)

...

...

MOT17-14-DPM

MOT17-14-DPM

(20.4% MOTA)

MOT17-14-FRCNN

MOT17-14-FRCNN

(19.9% 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.