Multi-Object Tracking Errors Minimisation by
Visual Similarity and Human Joints Detection
M. J. Gómez-Silva, J.M. Armingol, A. de la Escalera
{magomezs, armingol, escalera}@ing.uc3m.es
Intelligent Systems Lab (LSI) Research Group, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Leganés, Madrid, Spain
Keywords: Multi-Object Tracking, Data Association, Con-
volutional Pose Machine, Degree of Appearance Similarity,
Detection-by-Tracking.
Abstract
Multi-object tracking for video-surveillance is a challenging
task, especially in complex real-world scenes, where crossing
people can be easily mismatched, and the occlusions lead to
lose some tracks. Moreover, tracking-by-detection approaches
are badly affected by the inaccuracies of the chosen detector, so
that the number of both false positives and misses objects are
highly increased. This paper presents a methodology to reduce
such errors rates, by means of the design of a human shape
validation filter, a detection-by-tracking strategy and a novel
matching score, which fusions the geometric data given by the
detection of every person's joints and the visual similarity with
respect to a previously saved reference. The resulting tracking
performance enhancements are shown in a comparative evalu-
ation, also proving the capacity of this method to deal with the
faults of the provided detections.
1 Introduction
Tracking multiple people is one of the main tasks of an Intel-
ligent Surveillance System (ISS), whose purpose is to improve
and automate the management of the information provided by
a increasing number of security cameras. Multi-object tracking
(MOT) task consists of visually finding the location of multiple
individuals and conserving their identities in a sequence.
Most MOT algorithms address such problem following the
’tracking-by-detection’ paradigm, which joins a people detec-
tor and a data association algorithm to match each detection
with its corresponding identity. The application of tracking-
by-detection approaches in crowded scenes, with occlusions
and changing-trajectory or crossing people, produces certain
tracking errors, whose number is highly increased by the lack
of precision inherited from the used detector.
There are three main types of tracking errors: the false neg-
atives or missed agents, the false positives caused by the asso-
ciation of an identity to some object different from the agents
to track, and the identity switches, due to the association of the
wrong identity to a person. The definition of these errors and
the protocol used to measure them is established in [2].
8th International Conference on Imaging for Crime Detection and Prevention, ICDP-2017, Madrid 13-15 Dec. 2017
IET Digital Library
Many of the research efforts, focused on reducing the track-
ing errors, exploit the temporal coherency, [1], by the ex-
traction of people tracklets, i.e. a set of frames, sometimes
even requiring future frames. However, this paper proposes a
frame-by-frame association method, allowing an online track-
ing, without requiring the training of models for every individ-
ual. This is achieved by the fusion of three strategies, explained
below, which constitute the main contributions of this paper.
1. A novel formulation to score the matching of a certain
identity with a certain detection, by the fusion of a geo-
metric and a visual metric. The geometric metric is com-
puted from the distances from the joints locations of the
individuals to those in the previous frame, and the visual
metric measures the degree of appearance similarity be-
tween the new detections and the reference previously
saved for each tracked agent. The way in which these
metrics are combined is adaptable to the situations of
disappearing agents and crowded scenes, resulting in a
reduction of the identity switches.
2. A specialised search of every missed individual follow-
ing a detection-by-tracking approach. A Convolutional
Pose Machine (CPM), [16], is used to search a human
shape in the location where each missed agent is ex-
pected to be found. Therefore, this strategy reduces the
number of false negatives caused by the people detector.
3. A filter to validate the human shapes of the detected ob-
jects, which notably decreases the false positives rate.
The proposed approach has been tested on the CAVIAR1
dataset [4], proving the improvements in the tracking perfor-
mance thanks to the cited contributions. The obtained results
present the proposed MOT algorithm as a versatile one, adapt-
able to different detectors and robust against its errors rates,
providing successful results in comparison with other tracking-
by-detection approaches.
The rest of the paper is organised as follows. Section 2
gives an overview of the related state-of-the-art methods. Sec-
tion 3 describes the proposed solution, and its analysis and ex-
perimental results are presented in Section 4. Finally, the con-
clusions are exposed in Section 5.
1
The dataset is publicly available under
http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/rbf/CAVIARDATA1/.
25
2 Related Work
A lot of research has been developed in order to improve the
MOT task performance by means of enhancing one or several
of these four key parts of the tracking: the detections provided,
the way in which each identity is represented or modelled, and
the scoring metric and the association method used to match
the detections with their identities.
Some of the most commonly used data association methods
are based on Bayesian probability, such as Joint Probabilistic
Data Association Filters (JPDAF) [14] and Multiple Hypothe-
ses Tracking (MHT), recently revisited by [10]. Instead of that,
a global association method is proposed here, based on the
Hungarian method [11], which finds the detections-identities
assignment that minimises a certain matching cost. In [8] part
of the data association is solved by the Hungarian method,
where the cost is obtained from the detections locations.
Data association methods based on the detections locations
are usually improved by their previous estimation with a fil-
ter algorithm. Literature presents two main configurations for
them: a decentralized one, which assigns a tracker to each ob-
ject, like the Decentralized Particle Filter (DPF) [5], and a cen-
tralized one, where all the agent states form a single represen-
tation, such as the Tracker Hierarchy [19], and the Reversible
Jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo - Particle Filter (RJMCMC)
[9]. In this work, the head location of every tracked identity is
predicted by a Kalman Filter [17], widely used to estimate the
state of an agent with a set of measurements over time.
In crowded scenes, a location or motion-based associa-
tion method, such as [12], could find problems to deal with
changing-trajectory and crossing agents. To solve that, this
work presents the adaptation of the matching score formulation
to such situations, considering not only every person’s joints
locations but also the degree of appearance similarity with its
identity, [6].
Other approaches exploit the temporal consistency with a
batch tracking, like [1], using a tracklet to provide the cor-
rect matching. Some batch algorithms, such as the presented
in [15], present extraordinary results on complex surveillance
scenarios. However, it requires future frames, making impos-
sible an online tracking. Instead of that, the matching metric
used in this paper allows a frame-by-frame identification of the
agents. Other on-line approaches require learning a model for
every individual to track, [18], which results in the necessity of
a certain number of frames until getting reliable models. On
contrary, our method uses only one pre-trained model able to
visually identify any agent in critical situations, avoiding the
switch of the crossing-agents’ identities.
On the other hand, many efforts have been focused on the
enhancement of the human detection methods to avoid the loss
of some tracks and the starting of incorrect ones, that badly af-
fects the performance of the tracking-by-detection approaches,
as the proposed in this paper. In [1], the position and articula-
tion of the limbs are used to model every individual. This paper
proposes the use of the Convolutional Pose Machine (CPM),
presented in [16], to search a human joints structure for agents
missed by the detector, and to validate the detected ones.
8th International Conference on Imaging for Crime Detection and Prevention, ICDP-2017, Madrid 13-15 Dec. 2017
IET Digital Library
3 Proposed Approach
In this section, the proposed tracking algorithm is presented.
Firstly, a general view of the designed architecture and data
structures is given. Subsequently, the three main modules,
Human Shape Validation, Data Association, and Detection-by-
Tracking are described in detail.
3.1 Architecture
The architecture of the proposed tracking approach is shown in
Figure 1, where two iterations of the algorithm are represented.
In every iteration, the inputs are two sets, one of them is consti-
tuted by the list of identities to track, hereinafter called agents,
and the other contains the detections given by a previous people
detection stage. Subsequently, most of the false detections are
removed by a Human Shape Validation filter. This module uses
a CPM [16] to detect the locations of every detection’s joints,
and then it analyses the coherence of such locations according
to some physical human constraints.
The next stage is the data association process, which per-
forms the assignment of every remained detection to its corre-
sponding agent, whose representation is updated by that detec-
tion, constituting the input of the next frame.
However, not always there are as many detections as agents.
When a person is appearing for the first time in the scene, as it
is represented in the first frame of Figure 1, this causes a detec-
tion that is not matched with any of the existing agents, and it
must be added to the list of agents to be tracked in the follow-
ing frames. Moreover, sometimes the detector miss an individ-
ual, as it is shown in the second frame of Figure 1. Therefore,
there is not always a detection for every agent, so after the as-
sociation process, for the non-matched agents, its detection is
searched by the CPM. This strategy has been called detection-
by-tracking because joints are searched around the expected
location of the agent, which is predicted by a Kalman Filter. If
the detected joints present a human shape, the agent is consid-
ered as found and its representation is updated.
The output of every iteration is the updated list of agents to
track, whose identities are represented by different colours.
3.2 Human and Agent Structure
The proposed association method is based on localisation and
visual data about the searched agents and the found detections.
For that reason, two different types of structures have been de-
signed to render the necessary data for both sets. Each detec-
tion is represented by a structure named Human, formed by:
• A RoI (Region of Interest) structure rendering a box
bounding a human in a frame, with the upper left pixel
position (px , py ), and its dimensions.
• A vector, J, where each element jk is the location
(jk,x , jk,y ) of the joint k in the image. The length of J is
15, corresponding to this 15 human joints: head, neck,
shoulderr , elbowr , wristr , shoulderl , elbowl , wristl ,
hipr , kneer , ankler , hipl , kneel , anklel , waist, where
the sub-indexes r and l, mean right and left, respectively.
26
Figure 1. Proposed architecture.
Every agent is represented by a structure called Agent,
whose main attributes are the followings:
• A Human structure (defined above), updated by the cor-
responding detection in every iteration.
• An identity number, ID.
• A T racker structure to manage the Kalman filter asso-
ciated with the agent. This structure contains two main
variables: its state, x̂, defined by the location and veloc-
ity of the agent’s head, and the measurement, ẑ, updated
with the head location of its corresponding detection.
• An image called V isualRef erence, rendering the
agent's appearance the last time that it was matched.
• A flag named M atched that indicates if an agent has
been matched or not in the association process.
3.3 Human Shape Validation, HSV
The vector of joints, J hdi , of every detection is filled by a hu-
man joints detection algorithm, whose input is the zone delim-
ited by its bounding box, RoI hdi , in the current frame. The
joints detector is based on the CPM, presented in [16], which
has been adapted to be independent of the scale, that is the RoI
size.
Even when the given RoI is delimiting a frame region
where there is no human shape, the CPM tries to find its joints.
Obviously, in such cases, the given joints do not follow the
physical structure of a human body. For that reason, a Hu-
man Shape Validation, HSV, filter has been designed, coding
some constraints to ensure coherence among the human joints
locations in a walking pose, with the aim of eliminating those
detections not corresponding to people.
8th International Conference on Imaging for Crime Detection and Prevention, ICDP-2017, Madrid 13-15 Dec. 2017
IET Digital Library
3.4 Data Association
The aim of the data association process is to find the correct
assignment between the available human detections, given by
an array, H, of Human structures, and the agents saved in
an array, A, of Agent structures. Here, it is proposed the use
of a global association method, where all the possible match-
ings are considered at the same time, instead of independently
searching the best one for each agent.
In order to achieve that goal, a matrix, M , is created to col-
lect the costs of matching every agent, ai , with every human
detection, hj . The problem of finding the assignment with the
minimum total matching cost is solved by an optimisation al-
gorithm based on the Hungarian Method [11].
The cost matrix, M , combines the information about the
agents’ localisation and their visual appearance, which is col-
lected by the matrices D and S, respectively. D saves the
weighted mean Euclidean distance from the joints locations
of every agent to the joints of every human detection, as it is
defined by 1, where dE is the Euclidean distance operation be-
tween two points. W is a vector, where each element, wk , is
the weight given to the joint k. E is a vector, where each ele-
ment, ek , takes value 1 if the joint k has been detected and 0,
otherwise.
S collects the Degree of Appearance Similarity, DOAS, be-
tween every agent and every human detection, as is shown in
2. The DOAS is computed as the distance from a multidimen-
sional point to the boundary hyperplane learnt by a pre-trained
Support Vector Machine, SVM, as it is explained in [6]. That
multidimensional point is calculated by a descriptor based on a
Volume Local Binary Pattern, VLBP, that compares an agent’s
V isualRef erence with the region of the current frame delim-
ited by a human detection’s RoI.
27
 K 3.5 Detection-by-Tracking, DBT
ai h
k=1 dE (jk , jk )wk ek
j

dij = K (1)
k=1 wk ek
h
sij = DOAS(Rkai , Rk j ) (2)
Once D and S have been computed, their combination to
create M , defined by 3, can take three different formulations to
adapt it to some critical situations.
First, in order to make easier the assignment task, those de-
tections whose heads locations are outside a radial perimeter, of
radius Td , around the expected head location of a query agent,
are penalised with a high-cost matching value, P . The expected
head location of each agent is predicted by the Kalman filter
algorithm from the data of the agent’s T racker structure. For
the detections located inside the perimeter, the matching value
corresponds to the weighted mean distance between the joints
locations, dij , given by the matrix D.
However, if the joints distances from several detections to a
certain agent are similar, that means they differ in a value lower
than a certain threshold Tam , the matching for that agent is con-
sidered as ambiguous, as it is defined by the function fam (Ai ),
in 4. When this situation happens, for example in crowded
scenes with crossing people, the cost matching value is not
just dij , but this is multiplied by the corresponding DOAS,
sij , given by the matrix S. The DOAS metric takes values
in the range (-1, 1), where the higher value the more similar-
ity it means. Since our method penalises the dissimilarity, the
multiplying value is not sij , but its difference with respect the
maximum value found in the matrix S.
⎧ terExistCrossingPaths1 and 2), changing-trajectory individu-
⎨ P (hdij > Td )
mij = dij (hdij ≤ Td ) ∧ (fam (ai ) = 0)
⎩
dij (max(S) − sij ) (hdij ≤ Td ) ∧ (fam (ai ) = 1)
(3)
⎧
⎨ 1 ∃j ((dij − dij  ) < Tam ) ∧ (j = j  )
fam (ai ) = : dij  := min(di )
⎩
0 otherwise
(4)
Once the matrix M is computed, the Hungarian Method
found the best assignment, so that only one detection is
matched with each agent and vice-versa. The solution is given
through a matrix, R, where the elements corresponding to a
matching take value 0.
Only those agents that have been correctly matched, that
means its flag M atched is up, must be updated with its corre-
sponding detection. However, when the detection correspond-
ing to a certain agent is not available, any other incorrect detec-
tion could be assigned to it. To avoid the improperly updating
of an agent ai , its M atched flag, M atchedai , is not up un-
less the corresponding cost matching value was under a certain
threshold Tc , as well as, the corresponding element, rij , of the
resulting matrix R values 0, as is defined by 5.
 
1 ∃j | (rij = 0) ∧ (mij < Tc )
matched ai
= (5)
0 otherwise
For those agents, whose corresponding detection was not found
by the detector, a human shape is searched in the frame area
where those were supposed to be. This strategy is called
detection-by-tracking (DBT), because the Kalman Filter algo-
rithm, [17] is used to predict the agents'locations. Then the
joints detector algorithm explained in 3.3 is used to find human
joints around that.
Although it is impossible to detect new people who have
never been tracked before with the DBT strategy, this reduces
the number of lost tracks since it allows us to find a new de-
tection for missed agents. In addition, the HSV filter, 3.3, is
again used to ensure that the corresponding human detection
has been found, avoiding the detection of false positives in this
second people detection.
4 Experimental results
In this section, an analysis of the improvements produced by
each one of the presented contributions is given, as well as its
comparison with other tracking-by-detection methods. More-
over, the dataset and the evaluation metrics used to measure the
tracking performance are described.
4.1 Test Dataset
Our test dataset consists of six sequences belonging to
CAVIAR dataset [4], that presents some of the most chal-
lenging situation for the tracking: crossing people (En-
als (OneLeaveShopReenter1 and 2), groups and people reap-
pearing in the scene, where until 10 different identities appear
(OneShopOneWait1 and 2). For all the experiments, the pro-
posed approach has been forced to track every individual in
those sequences, as long as their detections were bigger than
13x26 pixels, and occluded in less than the 50%.
4.2 Evaluation Metrics
To evaluate the performance of our approach, the Multi-Object
Tracking Accuracy (M OT A),[2], defined by 6 has been calcu-
lated. FN , FP and IdSW are the summations of the number
of false negatives, FN,t , false positives, FP,t , and identification
switches, Idsw,t , respectively, divided by the sum of the num-
ber of ground truth objects, gt , at every frame, t, as is defined
by 7, 8 and 9.
M OT A = 1 − (FN + FP + IdSW ) (6)

t FN,t
FN =  (7)
t gt

FP,t
FP = t (8)
t gt
t IdSW,t
IdSW =  (9)
t gt

8th International Conference on Imaging for Crime Detection and Prevention, ICDP-2017, Madrid 13-15 Dec. 2017
IET Digital Library 28
4.3 Results
One of the main goals of this work is to obtain a MOT ap-
proach robust against the failures of the detections given as in-
put, to achieve a versatile MOT, where any people detector was
suitable. Our method has been fed by these three detectors: a
implementation of HOG-SVM people detector [3], one based
on the upper-body model trained by [7] for a Haar-Cascade
classifier, and the fusion of the two previous ones.
The tracking errors presented by out method are mainly
caused by the detector, as Table 1 shows: in the first case, a
80.08% of the FN are caused by the HOG-SVM detector, and
in the second case, a 94.40% of the FP are inherited from the
HAAR-Cascade detector. Moreover, our tracking algorithm is
not only able of avoiding the increase of the main errors pre-
sented by the detectors (which means a 100% performance)
but it also reduces such error rates. The reduced error rates are
highlighted in bold in Table 1. The high rate of FP presented
by HOG-SVM detector is decreased, as well as, the FN of the
HAAR-CASCADE detector and both metrics are improved for
the fusion of their detections. For that reason, the third detector
has been selected to conduct the rest of the experiments.
Table 1. Detectors and MOT errors rates.
Detector Detector+MOT
FN FP FN FP
HOG-SVM 10,465 11,577 13,067 610
HAAR-Cascade 8,846 472 6,753 500
FUSION 6,279 10,427 6,207 1,043
To measure the performance improvement caused by the
DBT and the HSV modules, four different versions of our MOT
algorithm (see Figure 1) have been tested over the mentioned
sequences (Section 4.1), and the results are shown in Figure 2.
In the first version, both modules have been removed, so the
tracking task is performed by the global data association mod-
ule. The second and the third versions include the modules of
DBT and HSV respectively, and the fourth version corresponds
to the complete proposed algorithm. The implementation of the
DBT strategy notably reduces the FN , which was its purpose,
although the FP increases. On the other hand, the implementa-
tion of the HSV filter remarkably decreases FP , for what it was
meant, but increments FN . However, the combination of both
strategies, on version 4, highly improves both metrics, resulting
in the enhancement of the tracking performance represented by
the M OT A value.
Figure 2. Effects of DBT and HSV modules on the M OT A.
8th International Conference on Imaging for Crime Detection and Prevention, ICDP-2017, Madrid 13-15 Dec. 2017
IET Digital Library
The low number of identity switches, IdSW , is due to the
proposed global association method based on the novel formu-
lation of the matching score (Section 3.4). To prove that fact,
the performance of our complete MOT algorithm (referred as
Global Association in Figure 3) has been compared with a ver-
sion where the data association is performed in an independent
way for each agent, and based only on its head location (Indi-
vidual Association). This experiment proves that the proposed
association method not only reduces IdSW but also FN , FP ,
leading to a prominent enhancement of the MOTA value.
Figure 3. Comparison of Data Association methods.
The results obtained for the EnterExistCrossingP aths
and OneShopOneW ait sequences are presented in Table
2. The resulting performance has been compared with other
tracking-by-detection methods: Decentralized Particle Filters
(DP F ), [13], Tracker Hierarchy (Hierarchy), [19], and Re-
versible Jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo - Particle Filter
(RJM CM C), [9]. These methods present high errors rates,
which are generally decreased by the proposed strategies, re-
sulting in a remarkable improvement of the MOTA.
Table 2. MOT results comparison on .
FN FP IdSW M OT A
EnterExistCrossingP aths sequence
Proposed MOT 0.34 0.07 0.02 0.57
DPF 0.41 0.37 0.00 0.22
Hierarchy 0.63 0.12 0.02 0.25
RJMCMC 0.40 0.08 0.01 0.51
OneShopOneW ait sequence
Proposed MOT 0.49 0.09 0.05 0.37
DPF 0.45 0.45 0.01 0.09
Hierarchy 0.67 0.04 0.03 0.26
RJMCMC 0.69 0.15 0.02 0.14
5 Conclusions
In this paper, the problem of minimising the most common
Multi-Object Tracking errors has been addressed by the design
of three strategies, implemented in a people tracking applica-
tion. A novel matching score formulation adaptable to the situ-
ations of crossing, missed and occluded individuals have been
proposed. Its use in a global data association method has pro-
vided a notable reduction of the identities switches. Further-
more, the rate of objects improperly tracked has been decreased
by the search of human shape coherence in the joints locations
for every detection, by the designed Human Shape Validation
29
filter. In addition, the problem of losing some individuals has
been managed with a detection-by-tracking method, based on
the proper scale adaptation of a Convolutional Pose Machine.
The proposed combination of these contributions has re-
sulted in a versatile and robust Multi-Object Tracking method
with a highly improved tracking performance and able not only
to cope with the failures of the detections used to feed it, but
also to decrease them. The comparison with other tracking-
by-detection approaches has provided successful results for
the presented method, whose frame-by-frame data association
method allows an online tracking of any agent, without previ-
ous or online learning of dedicated models for them.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Spanish Government through
the CICYT project (TRA2013-48314-C3-1-R), (TRA2015-
63708-R) and Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte para
la Formación de Profesorado Universitario (FPU14/02143),
and Comunidad de Madrid through SEGVAUTO-TRIES
(S2013/MIT-2713).
References
[1] Mykhaylo Andriluka, Stefan Roth, and Bernt Schiele.
People-tracking-by-detection and people-detection-by-
tracking. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,
2008. CVPR 2008. IEEE Conference on, pages 1–8.
IEEE, 2008.
[2] Keni Bernardin and Rainer Stiefelhagen. Evaluating mul-
tiple object tracking performance: the clear mot met-
rics. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing,
2008(1):1–10, 2008.
[3] Navneet Dalal and Bill Triggs. Histograms of oriented
gradients for human detection. In Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, 2005. CVPR 2005. IEEE Computer
Society Conference on, volume 1, pages 886–893. IEEE,
2005.
[4] Robert Fisher, Jose Santos-Victor, and James Crowley.
Caviar: Context aware vision using image-based active
recognition, 2005.
[5] David Gerónimo Gomez, Frédéric Lerasle, and Antonio
López Peña. State-driven particle filter for multi-person
tracking. In Advanced Concepts for Intelligent Vision Sys-
tems, pages 467–478. Springer, 2012.
[6] Marı́a José Gómez-Silva, José Marı́a Armingol, and Ar-
turo de la Escalera. Multi-object tracking with data asso-
ciation by a similarity identification model. In 7th Inter-
national Conference on Imaging for Crime Detection and
Prevention (ICDP 2016), pages 25–30. IET, 2016.
[7] Modesto Castrillon-Santana Hannes Kruppa and Bernt
Schiele. Fast and robust face finding via local con-
text. In Joint IEEE International Workshop on Visual
8th International Conference on Imaging for Crime Detection and Prevention, ICDP-2017, Madrid 13-15 Dec. 2017
IET Digital Library
Surveillance and Performance Evaluation of Tracking
and Surveillance, October 2003”.
[8] Chang Huang, Bo Wu, and Ramakant Nevatia. Robust
object tracking by hierarchical association of detection
responses. In European Conference on Computer Vision,
pages 788–801. Springer, 2008.
[9] Zia Khan, Tucker Balch, and Frank Dellaert. Mcmc-
based particle filtering for tracking a variable number of
interacting targets. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis
and machine intelligence, 27(11):1805–1819, 2005.
[10] Chanho Kim, Fuxin Li, Arridhana Ciptadi, and James M
Rehg. Multiple hypothesis tracking revisited. In Proceed-
ings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer
Vision, pages 4696–4704, 2015.
[11] Harold W Kuhn. The hungarian method for the assign-
ment problem. Naval research logistics quarterly, 2(1-
2):83–97, 1955.
[12] Niall McLaughlin, Jesus Martinez Del Rincon, and Paul
Miller. Enhancing linear programming with motion mod-
eling for multi-target tracking. In Applications of Com-
puter Vision (WACV), 2015 IEEE Winter Conference on,
pages 71–77. IEEE, 2015.
[13] Patrick Perez, Jaco Vermaak, and Andrew Blake. Data
fusion for visual tracking with particles. Proceedings of
the IEEE, 92(3):495–513, 2004.
[14] Christopher Rasmussen and Gregory D. Hager. Proba-
bilistic data association methods for tracking complex vi-
sual objects. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and
Machine Intelligence, 23(6):560–576, 2001.
[15] Bing Wang, Gang Wang, Kap Luk Chan, and Li Wang.
Tracklet association with online target-specific metric
learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Com-
puter Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1234–1241,
2014.
[16] Shih-En Wei, Varun Ramakrishna, Takeo Kanade, and
Yaser Sheikh. Convolutional pose machines. In Proceed-
ings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pat-
tern Recognition, pages 4724–4732, 2016.
[17] Greg Welch and Gary Bishop. An introduction to the
kalman filter. 1995.
[18] Min Yang and Yunde Jia. Temporal dynamic appearance
modeling for online multi-person tracking. Computer Vi-
sion and Image Understanding, 153:16–28, 2016.
[19] Jianming Zhang, Liliana Lo Presti, and Stan Sclaroff.
Online multi-person tracking by tracker hierarchy. In
Advanced Video and Signal-Based Surveillance (AVSS),
2012 IEEE Ninth International Conference on, pages
379–385. IEEE, 2012.
30