Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Knowledge-Based Systems
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/knosys

Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual

object tracking✩
∗
Di Yuan a ,1 , Nana Fan a ,1 , Zhenyu He a,b ,
a
School of Computer Science and Technology, Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
b
Peng Cheng Laboratory, Shenzhen 518055, China

article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: Discriminative correlation filters (DCFs) have been widely used in the tracking community recently.
Received 27 June 2019 DCFs-based trackers utilize samples generated by circularly shifting from an image patch to train a
Received in revised form 10 January 2020 ridge regression model, and estimate target location using a response map generated by the correlation
Accepted 13 January 2020
filters. However, the generated samples produce some negative effects and the response map is
Available online xxxx
vulnerable to noise interference, which degrades tracking performance. In this paper, to solve the
Keywords: aforementioned drawbacks, we propose a target-focusing convolutional regression (CR) model for
Visual object tracking visual object tracking tasks (called TFCR). This model uses a target-focusing loss function to alleviate
Discriminative correlation filters the influence of background noise on the response map of the current tracking image frame, which
Target-focusing model effectively improves the tracking accuracy. In particular, it can effectively balance the disequilibrium
Convolutional regression
of positive and negative samples by reducing some effects of the negative samples that act on the
object appearance model. Extensive experimental results illustrate that our TFCR tracker achieves
competitive performance compared with state-of-the-art trackers. The code is available at: https:
//github.com/deasonyuan/TFCR.
© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction multiplication in the frequency domain. This obviously reduces

Visual object tracking is a significant topic in the computer
vision community. The task of tracking is to sequentially locate
a target, specified by the ground-truth in the first image frame,
for the remaining frame of a video sequence. Certain complex
tracking environmental factors make the tracking task quite chal-
lenging, such as occlusion, deformation, background clutter, and
scale variation.
Recently, regression-based methods have attracted signifi-
cant attention from more and more visual object tracking re-
searchers, such as discriminative correlation filters (DCFs)-based
methods [1–6] and convolutional regression (CR)-based meth-
ods [7–10]. DCFs-based trackers can be densely sampled by a
convolution operation, after extracting the features from a search
image patch only once. According to the Convolution Theorem,
the convolution calculation can be transformed to element-wise
✩ No author associated with this paper has disclosed any potential or
pertinent conflicts which may be perceived to have impending conflict with
this work. For full disclosure statements refer to https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.
2020.105526.
∗ Corresponding author at: School of Computer Science and Technology,
Harbin Institute of Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China.
E-mail address: zhenyuhe@hit.edu.cn (Z. He).
1 D. Yuan and N. Fan have equal contribution to this paper.
the computational complexity, which enables these trackers to
efficiently learn from additional training samples. However, com-
pared with real samples in real-world tracking scenes, the syn-
thetic samples generated by the convolution operation simul-
taneously produce the boundary effect, which makes them less
elegant and cause poor performance in the visual object tracking
task [1,11–15]. In order to effectively alleviate the negative effect
introduced by synthetic samples, the correlation filter model can
be reformulated as a one-layer convolutional neural network
(CNN) in these trackers [7,9].
Although CR-based algorithms have achieved favorable track-
ing performance, they are also limited by the imbalance between
positive and negative samples. Similar to the class imbalance
in classification [16–21], it also exists in regression-based track-
ing methods that the background samples are far more than
the target samples during the training process in each frame in
regression-based tracking methods the number of background
samples is far greater than the number of target samples used
in the training process for each frame [5,8,9,22–24]. Thus, the
training process is excessively dominated by background samples.
In addition, a trained object appearance model must estimate
the unknown appearances of the target in the tracking task.
Therefore, the appearance model should place more attention
emphasis on the target sample than on the background samples.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526
0950-7051/© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
2 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 1. The comparisons results of our proposed TFCR tracker and other representative trackers (KCF [1], BACF [5] and CREST [7]) on some challenging tracking
sequences. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
In order to solve the above-mentioned problems, we propose
a Target-Focusing Convolutional Regression (TFCR) model for the
visual object tracking task. Different from other CR model-based
trackers, our CR model uses a target-focusing strategy, which
allows the model to focus more on the target samples than
on the background samples. Specifically, we use an improved
target-focused regression model to train the convolutional neural
network, which tends to pay more attention to the target sample
and reduces the influence of the background sample on the target
appearance model. Because there are 104 − 105 background sam-
ples but only a few target samples during the training process in
per frame. This situation can lead to the appearance model being
overwhelmed by the background samples, which decreases the
tracking performance. When we put the target-focusing strategy
into the convolutional regression model, this places more focus
on the target than on the background. Meanwhile, the target-
focusing loss function can effectively balance the proportion of
positive and negative samples, and prevent overfitting the ap-
pearance model to the background samples. In practice, we found
that the TFCR model usually produced accurate tracking results as
shown in Fig. 1.
The main contributions of this work are as follows:
• We propose a target-focusing loss function to place more
focus on target samples, and simultaneously reduce the ef-
fect of background samples acting on the object appearance
model.
• We integrate the target-focusing loss function with a con-
volutional regression model for visual tracking, which can
effectively improve the quality of the response map and
improve the tracking performance directly.
• Extensive experiments on the standard benchmarks show
that the proposed TFCR tracker performs favorably against
state-of-the-art trackers.
The rest of this paper is structured as follows. We first give a
brief survey of recent related works in Section 2. Next, we pro-
vide an exhaustive characterization of our target-focusing con-
volutional regression model, including the introduction of the
convolutional regression model, the target-focusing loss function
and the tracking process of our TFCR tracker in Section 3. Subse-
quently, we present the implementation details, the evaluation
criterion and the evaluation of our proposed TFCR tracker on
some comprehensive benchmark datasets in Section 4. Finally, we
give a concise conclusion about our work in Section 5.
Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
2. Related work
DCFs-based trackers. Discriminative Correlation filters (DCFs)
have been widely used in visual object tracking task in recent
years. In [25], a MOSSE filter has been proposed for the tracking
task, which can use a single image frame to produce steady
correlation filters and the tracking speed is nearly 670 frames
per second. However, the tracking accuracy of the MOSSE tracker
cannot meet the actual demand. In order to improve the tracking
accuracy, Henriques et al. [1] proposed a KCF tracker, which
used kernel methods and HOG features with correlation filters.
Danelljan et al. [26] improved the single-channel gray value fea-
ture used in the tracking task by adopting color attributes. These
trackers described above are susceptible to noise interference
and reduced its stability. In order to make the tracker more
robust, several patch-based correlation filter trackers have been
proposed [27–31]. Liu et al. [27] proposed a patch-based tracking
method with multi-CFs models. The combination of multiple
parts can effectively manage the effects of noise. Li et al. [28] gives
a reliable part-based tracking algorithm that attempts to evaluate
and utilize reliable parts to track an object through the entire
tracking process. These trackers produce training samples using
a cyclic shift of the image patch, which causes some boundary
effects. To address the boundary effects, the CFLB [32] tracker
takes advantage of the intrinsic computational redundancy in
the Fourier domain, which obviously limits the circular bound-
ary effects in the tracking task. Galoogahi et al. [5] proposed a
Background-Aware Correlation Filter (BACF) based on HOG fea-
tures, which efficiently modulates the varies of an object in
both the foreground and background. The spatially regularized
DCFs [11,13,33] tracker adopt large space support to learn the
correlation filters, which effectively reduces the boundary effect
but at a high computational cost. Although these trackers have
high tracking speed, tracking task is still a thorny problem due to
the imbalanced training samples and because the response map is
easily disturbed by noise. As an alternative to these trackers, we
propose a target-focusing convolutional regression model, which
effectively reduces the influence of background samples acting
on the object appearance model and improves the quality of the
response map.
CNN-based trackers. In recent research, deep learning has
obtained impressive results in areas of computer vision, such as
segmentation, classification, detection, and tracking. The convo-
lutional neural network (CNN) [34–41] is the most fashionable
deep learning model in visual object tracking, because of its
formidable capability for feature extraction and representation.
 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 2. The framework of our proposed approach. In the training stage, we use the target-focusing loss function to reduce the influences of background samples and
maximize the response of the object target sample. After that, the response map in the next image frame will be improved to locate the object target accurately.
Because hand-crafted features have a significant impact on track-
ing performance, Nam et al. [42] proposed an MDNet tracker
built on a discriminatively trained CNN model with many tracking
videos, and a pre-trained model with some shared layers and a bi-
nary classification layer to obtain a generic target representation.
Liu et al. [37] presented a multi-scale spatiotemporal features
model to accurately estimate the size of the tracking target. Li
et al. [40] analyzed a DeepTrack method, which selected samples
through cluster sampling and employed a CNN architecture with
a structural loss function to evaluate the similarity of these sam-
ples. The features extracted from a single CNN layer were further
improved with multiple layers. Inspired by this, Qi et al. [43]
proposed taking advantage of the abundance of features from
different CNN layers to train several weak trackers and fuse them
into a strong one. In [44], Tao et al. tried to use a similarity
function to select an image patch that was the most similar to the
initialized target. The strength of the similarity matching function
came from a Siamese network. Valmadre et al. [45] decoded the
DCFs learner as a differentiable CNN layer and tracking target in
an end-to-end way. Different from these CNN-based trackers, our
TFCR tracker uses a target-focusing strategy to decrease the in-
fluence of background samples and maximize the response of the
target sample, which effectively improves tracking performance.
Attention Loss. The attention strategy has been used in track-
ing tasks for a considerable time [46–52]. Fan et al. [46] proposed
a spatial attention method for robust object tracking. In order
to mitigate the model drift, Cui et al. [47] proposed a recurrent
target-attending tracking method that attempts to evaluate and
utilize those trustworthy parts in the overall tracking process.
Choi et al. [48] propose an attention-modulated tracking method
to decomposes a target into multiple-parts, and multiple elemen-
tary trackers were trained to adjust the attention distribution
of the multiple-parts. Then, they adaptively selected the sub-
set of correlation filters using a deep attention network based
on the dynamic characteristics of the tracking target [50]. The
spatial–temporal attention mechanism was also used in the track-
ing task for robust and effective tracking performance [51,52].
Zhu et al. [51] proposed using the flow information across con-
secutive frames to improve feature representation and tracking
performance. In [52], Wang et al. reconstructed the correlation
filters in a Siamese network and added three different attention
mechanisms, which effectively alleviated the over-fitting problem
in deep learning and enhanced the algorithm’s discriminative
ability and adaptability. Different from these attention strategies,
we use a target-focusing convolutional regression model to bal-
ance the effect of positive and negative samples on the trained
object appearance model. The target-focusing loss function effec-
tively improves the object appearance model by weakening the
influence of the negative samples.
3. Target-focusing convolutional regression
In this section, we present the proposed Target-Focusing Con-
volutional Regression. Firstly, we introduce the standard con-
volutional regression. Then, we propose a Target-focusing loss
function on convolutional regression. Furthermore, we show the
tracking process via the proposed TFCR tracker. Fig. 2 shows the
TFCR tracking pipeline and the details are discussed below.
Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
3
3.1. Convolutional regression
The Convolutional Regression (CR) model reformulates the
DCFs as a one-layer CNN network. The CR model is learned
from a training patch and estimates the target location using
the response map. We denote a training patch X and CR model.
Therefore, the cost function can be written as follows,
J(w ) = J(w; ϕ (X )) + λr(w ), (1)
where ϕ (X ) denotes the feature map extracted from training
image patch X , J(w; ϕ (X )) is the error term, and r(w ) is the weight
decay term. λ denotes the importance of the weight decay term
r(w ).
Similar to the DCFs, CREST [7] and CRT [9] adopt the L2 norm
as the weight decay term r(w ), and adopt the least squares
method for the error term J(w; ϕ (X )). The cost function in Eq. (1)
can be specifically written as follows,
J(w ) = ∥w ∗ ϕ (X ) − y∥2 + λ∥w∥2 , (2)
where ∗ indicates the convolution operation, and y is the desired
response map, a Gaussian distribution centered at the target
location.
3.2. Target-focusing loss
For the visual tracking task, the target samples are obtained
from the tracking results. These samples are very limited in num-
ber, and spatially overlapped. Compared with the target samples,
the background samples are massive and varied. Obviously, the
training procedure is dominated by the background samples. We
propose a target-focusing loss on convolutional regression to
improve the influence of the target samples on the appearance
model.
Because a trained appearance model is used for estimating
the candidates in a new image frame, the maximum value in
the response map is always lower than the desired value. In
other words, the appearance model in standard convolutional
regression is insufficient. Different from the least square method,
we focus on the relative relationship between target samples and
background samples. It can be formulated as follows,
J(w ) = ∥w ∗ ϕ (X ) − y∥2 − η∥w ∗ ϕ (X )∥2 + λ∥w∥2 , (3)
where η controls the relative importance, and ∥w ∗ ϕ (X )∥2 is the
target-focusing part, which is used to increase the role of the
target part in the regression model. Because a trained appearance
model is used to estimate the candidates in a new frame, the
maximum value in the response map is always lower than the de-
sired value. The desired responses of the background samples are
close to zero, as shown in Fig. 3(a). Therefore, Eq. (3) committed
to increasing the relative difference between the responses of the
target samples and the background samples. At the same time, it
maximizes the responses of the target samples.
In order to explain the problem more concisely, we denote an
extra variable y′ ,
y′ = w ∗ ϕ (X ). (4)
4 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 3. (a) The desired response map, there is a clear dividing line between the target sample and the background samples, and the response map is continuous
smooth and non-multimodal. (b) A visualization example of the derivatives of y′ . It can be clearly seen that the influences of background samples have been more
reduced by target-focusing loss than L2 loss.

Fig. 4. The response maps and tracking results on #370 and #375 image frames on the Lemming sequence. The response map can be improved with the target-
focusing (TF) loss function, which can locate the object target accurately. The rightest column shows the tracking results, the red box represents the object target
location with TF loss and the green box represents the object target location without TF loss.

During the training stage, the derivative of y′ associated with
the loss function J and can be obtained according to Eq. (3) as
follows,
∂J
= [2(y′ − y) − 2ηy′ ]
∂ y′
= 2[(1 − η)y′ − y].
To further illustrate the difference between the effects of the
L2 loss and the target-focusing loss on convolutional regression,
we visualize an example of the derivative of y′ in Fig. 3(b). To
clearly show the difference, we vectorize the gradients of which
the target samples correspond to the center locations. From the
figure, we can see that compared with the L2 loss, the target-
focusing loss reduces the influence of the background samples
and maximizes the response of the target sample. In other words,
it increases the relative gap between the background samples and
the target samples.
The target-focusing loss function enables the response map
to focus on the target region rather than the background region
in image frames. Fig. 4 shows an example to explain how the
target-focusing loss function affects the response map in practice.
The response maps and tracking results on tth image frame with
(or without) the target-focusing loss function can be seen in
Fig. 4. It clearly demonstrates that the response map with the
target-focusing loss function has high confidence and accurately
locates the target. On the contrary, the response map without the
target-focusing loss function is disturbed and loses the target.
3.3. Tracking via TFCR
In this section, we slightly illustrate the detailed procedure of
our TFCR tracker for visual object tracking. The tracking process
involves four parts, which include:
(5)
Model initialization. Model initialization is the first and impor-
tant step in the tracking task [14,53,54]. After the first image
frame with the ground-truth is captured, we can obtain a training
image patch with labels from it. The training patch centered
on the target but is larger than the target. Then, we utilize the
proposed tracking framework to extract features and acquire the
response map from the training image patch. Our TFCR, like most
trackers, adopts the VGGNet [55] for feature extraction. Mean-
while, all the parameters in the convolutional regression layer
are randomly initialized and follow a zero-mean two-dimensional
Gaussian distribution.
Online detection. Online detection is directly related to tracking
performance [56,57]. When the object target in the tth frame
is located, the tracker can use it as the central location area to
extract a search image patch. In the t + 1th frame, the image
patch is fed into the proposed tracking framework to generate a
response map, which is improved by the target-focusing function.
After the improved response map is obtained, the tracker can
obtain the target center from the maximum value point on the
response map.
Scale estimation. Because the distance between the moving
target and the camera is always changing, the moving target’s

Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx
scale estimation is highly significant to the visual object tracking
task [58,59]. After the target location has been obtained, we
can extract some search patches at different scales with the
same central location and feed them into the proposed feature
extractor. After that, the corresponding prediction maps can be
acquired and we can select the optimal scale factor by searching
for the maximum value in these prediction maps. The width wt
and height ht of the target in the tth frame is updated with the
following formula,
(wt , ht ) = β (wt −1 , ht −1 ),
where wt −1 and ht −1 are the width and height of the target in the
previous frame, and β is a smoothing factor.
Model update. Model updating is an essential component in the
tracking task [1,5,7,9]. In the course of the movement, the shape,
scale, and appearance of the object target will vary. If the model
does not update, it has difficulty to fit the change in the target,
thus it cannot track it very well over the entire tracking process.
In the online visual object tracking process, we generate training
samples that are consistent from the beginning to the end. For
each image frame, after the object target location is determined,
we can obtain its ground-truth. After that, we can use the search
patch as a training patch. The training patch and response map
can be collected from each T frame to be sent to the proposed
tracker for online model updating.
The integral tracking framework is given in Algorithm 1.
Algorithm 1 Tracking via TFCR
Input: The ground-truth of target in first frame, the tracking
sequences {Xt }Tt=1 .
Output: Tracking result in each image frame.
1: Crop the training patch P1 centered at the target T1 in first
image frame I1 ;
2: Generate a Gaussian label Y1 centered at the target T1 ;
3: Train the TFCR model with Eq. (3) using the training patch P1
and the Gaussian label Y1 ;
4: for t = 2 to T (T is the total number of each sequence) do
5: Crop the training patch Pt centered at the target Tt in tth
image frame It ;
6: Extract the target features from It with area Pt ;
7: Use TFCR model to determine the center location of target;
8: Use Eq. (6) to determine the size of target;
9: if t%2 == 0 then
10: Update the TFCR model with Eq. (3).
11: end if
12: end for
4. Experiments
We evaluated the proposed TFCR tracker by comparing it with
some state-of-the-art trackers including MDNet [42], BACF [5],
CREST [7], SRDCF [11], DeepSRDCF [13], SRDCFdecon [33], HDT
[43], SINT [44], CFNet-conv5 [45], ACFN [50], SiamFC [60], STRes-
Net_CF [61], DSST [58], KCF [1], CNT [62], ADNet [63] and C–COT
[64] on three widely used datasets OTB-2013, OTB-2015 and
TC-128 [65–67].
4.1. Implementation details
In the visual object tracking task, the target’s ground-truth is
given in the first image frame. We can obtain the training patches
with labels from the first image frame and the training patches
are 5 times larger than the target in terms of both width and
Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
5
height. The search image patch and the train image patch are
of the same size, which is useful in the tracking process. The
feature extraction network that we adopted was a VGG-16 [55]
network with only the first two max-pooling layers. We ex-
tracted the feature maps from the conv4-3 layer. To improve the
tracking speed, a PCA method was used to decrease the feature
channels to 64 dimensions. In the training stage, we iteratively
used the ADMM optimizer to update the coefficients, and the
learning rate was set to 5e—8. We update the network every
T = 2 frames with a learning rate set to 2e–8. The parameter
(6) η in Eq. (3) was set to 0.5. In the scale estimation stage, the
parameter β of the scale factors was set to [0.95, 1.00, 1.05]. Our
experiments were performed on a PC with an i7 4.2 GHz CPU,
32 GB RAM and an Nvidia GTX 1080Ti GPU with MatConvNet
toolbox. The average tracking speed was probably 2 fps. In order
to ensure fairness, the tracking results of the contrast trackers
were taken from the authors’ homepage or from https://github.
com/foolwood/benchmark_results/blob/master/README.md.
4.2. Evaluation criterion
To evaluate the tracking performance of our TFCR tracker,
the One-Pass Evaluation (OPE) which was proposed in the OTB-
2013 [65] benchmark was used as the evaluation index. The OPE
strategy has two parts: precision plots and success plots. The
precision plots show an accurate percentage of predicted position
and ground-truth under different thresholds [65,67,68]. The suc-
cess plots measure an average overlap, which accounts for both
size and position. As with multitudinous tracking algorithms, we
used the Pascal VOC Overlap Ratio (VOR) [69] to express it. Given
the resulting bounding box rb and the ground-truth bounding box
gb , the VOR score (Vs ) can be computed as:
S {rb ∩ gb }
Vs = , (7)
S {rb ∪ gb }
where ∩ denotes the intersection of the two regions, ∪ denotes
the union of the two regions, and S {·} denotes the area of the
corresponding region. Then, the frame whose Vs is greater than
the threshold is considered the successful frame, and the ratio
of the successful frames plot in the success plots and the ranges
from 0 to 1.
4.3. Ablation studies on OTB-2013
In this section, we analyze the proposed TFCR tracker on
the OTB-2013 benchmark by showing the effect of our contri-
butions. We first achieve a Baseline tracker without using the
target-focusing loss function. And then, considering the relative
relationship between the target samples and the background
samples, we propose using the target-focusing loss function to
improve the baseline tracker (called TFCR). There are some exper-
imental results to verify the improvement on the OTB-2013 [65]
dataset.
Fig. 5 demonstrates the OPE results on the OTB-2013 dataset.
We can observe that using the target-focusing loss mechanism
(TFCR) obviously improves the tracking performance. Specifically,
the TFCR tracker achieves 0.671 as a success plot score and
0.871 as a precision plot score. Compared with our baseline
tracker (0.636/0.831), the proposed TFCR tracker achieved im-
provements about 5.5% and 4.8%, respectively. This is because
the target-focusing loss function could reduce the influences of
the background samples and maximize the response of the tar-
get sample effectively, which effectively improves the tracking
performance.
The OPE performances of these two trackers on the AUC score
for each attribute are shown in Table 1, which further verified
6 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 5. Precision and success plots of OPE on the OTB2013 dataset. The numbers in the legend indicate the distance precision rate (DPR) at 20 pixels for precision
plots and the average area-under-the-curve (AUC) scores for success plots.

Fig. 6. The precision plots and success plots of OPE on OTB2015 over 100 standard benchmark video sequences. To mark it clear, we just plot the top ten trackers.

Table 1
The success scores of the baseline tracker and the TFCR tracker on OTB2013 for different attributes (fast motion (FM), background
clutters (BC), motion blur (MB), deformation (DEF), illumination variation (IV), in-plane rotation (IPR), low resolution (LR), occlusion
(OCC), out-plane rotation (OPR), out-of-view (OV) and scale variation (SV)). The value format of each table cell is ‘‘AUC (%)’’ score.
Attributes FM BC MB DEF IV IPR LR OCC OPR OV SV
Baseline 60.4 59.4 63.7 62.3 58.7 61.3 52.4 61.6 60.9 47.5 60.8
TFCR 63.2 64.2 62.6 65.2 64.5 62.1 43.3 66.1 66.1 60.5 66.4

the effectiveness of the target-focusing loss function on the visual
object tracking task. It can be clearly seen that under almost all
11 attributes, the proposed tracker (TFCR) achieved significant
performance improvement over the baseline tracker. On the con-
trary, the performance of our TFCR was lower than the baseline
for the attributes of motion blur (MB) and low resolution (LR).
This was probably because of the inaccurate tracking of previous
image frames interfered with our tracker. In general, these results
directly reflect the importance of a target-focusing loss function
in the visual tracking process.
4.4. Experiment on OTB-2015
In this section, to validate the effectiveness of our TFCR tracker,
we make comparisons with some state-of-the-art trackers includ-
ing MDNet [42], BACF [5], CREST [7], SRDCF [11], DeepSRDCF [13],
SRDCFdecon [33], HDT [43], SINT [44], CFNet-conv5 [45], ACFN
[50], SiamFC [60], CNT [62] and ADNet [63] on OTB-2015 [67]
dataset.
Fig. 6 demonstrates the OPE results of the proposed TFCR
tracker and the 13 state-of-the-art trackers on the OTB-2015
dataset. Our tracker (0.876/0.665) is the third-best tracker in the
precision plots and the second-best tracker in the success plots.
Compared to the best multi-domain CNN-based MDNet tracker,
the proposed TFCR tracker showed slightly worse in tracking
accuracy. This is mainly because our TFCR tracker does not use
multi-domain information. Compared with the precision score
(0.838) and success score (0.623) of the convolutional residual
learning tracker CREST [7], the proposed TFCR tracker obtained
improvements of approximately 3.42% and 6.58%. Whereas, com-
pared with the ADNet tracker [63] (0.880/0.646), the proposed
TFCR tracker showed very close to the same performance as the
ADNet tracker for precision score, and obtained improvements of
approximate 3.25% in success score. This result demonstrates that
the target-focusing loss strategy is very suitable for visual object
tracking task.
Fig. 7 shows the tracking accuracy and tracking speed of our
TFCR tracker and other state-of-the-art trackers on the OTB-2015
dataset. From this figure, we can see that our tracker has achieved
favorable tracking accuracy. But the tracking speed still needs to
be improved.
The success plots of these different trackers on some attributes
are illustrated in Fig. 8. We can see that our TFCR tracker has
the best or the second best tracking performance for almost all
attributes. For the attributes of fast motion, motion blur, out of
view, low resolution, occlusion and scale variation, the convo-
lutional residual learning tracker CREST [7] and other trackers
do not perform well in such scenes, and there is an obvious

Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx 7

Fig. 7. The comparison of tracking speed and tracking accuracy on OTB-2015
dataset. The horizontal and vertical coordinates correspond to tracking speed
and AUC overlap ratio score, respectively. The proposed TFCR tracker achieves
a favorable accuracy against the state-of-the-art trackers.
performance gap compared with our proposed tracker. Other
attributes such as deformation, illumination variation and scale
variation, the performance of the ADNet [63] tracker is very close
to that of our TFCR tracker. For the background clutter attribute,
the performance of the ADNet [63] is better than that of our
TFCR tracker, and it is probable that the ADNet [63] tracker could
benefit from the action-decision Network which trained with
supervised learning and reinforcement learning. Meanwhile, our
TFCR tracker mainly benefited from the target-focusing strategy,
which affected our tracker when the background was cluttered.
For the low resolution attribute, the performance of the CFNet-
conv5 [45] tracker won the first rank and was 3.3% higher than
our TFCR tracker. This is probably due to the low resolution of the
image frame, which makes our target-focusing loss function fail
to work very well.
Our proposed tracker (TFCR) showed significantly better track-
ing performance than the other representative trackers, includ-
ing BACF [5], CFNet-conv5 [45], ACFN [50] and DeepSRDCF [13]
in the visual object tracking sequences. Fig. 9 shows a qual-
itative comparison of these five trackers on some challenging
tracking sequences. The tracking results of the BACF [5] tracker
show that in the scene of illumination variation, fast motion,
and background cluster, the tracking is easily interrupted, and
the tracking performance reduced. This may be because it uses
the HOG features, which cannot model the appearance of the
target very well in complex tracking scenes. In comparison, the
DeepSRDCF [13] tracker investigates the impact of CNN-based
features in a DCFs-based framework. It performs well for oc-
clusion and background clusters (basketball). However, direct
fusion limits the potential of the model for illumination vari-
ation (matrix and skating1) and fast motion (motorRolling and
skiing). The CFNet-conv5 [45] tracker interprets the DCFs-based
model as a differentiable layer in a CNN-based framework, which
can manage occlusion and background cluster (basketball) effec-
tively. Because it uses an attentional correlation filter network,

Fig. 8. The success plots of some select attributions (fast motion, background clutter, motion blur, deformation, illumination variation, out of view, low resolution,
occlusion and scale variation) on OTB2015 dataset. To mark it clear, we just plot the top ten trackers.

Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
8 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 9. Qualitative comparison of our TFCR tracker and other representative trackers (BACF [5], DeepSRDCF [13], CFNet-conv5 [45] and ACFN [50]) on some visual
object tracking sequences (motorRolling, skiing, matrix, basketball and skating1) with fast motion, scale variation, illumination variation, deformation and other
challenges. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Table 2
Precision and AUC scores of C-COT, BACF, SRDCF, DeepSRDCF, SRDCFdecon, STResNet_CF, CFNet, HDT, DSST, KCF and our TFCR on
TC-128[66] dataset. The first, second and third best scores are highlighted in red, blue and green colors, respectively.
Trackers TFCR C-COT BACF SRDCF DeepSRDCF SRDCFdecon STResNet_CF CFNet HDT DSST KCF
Prec. scores 77.6 78.3 66.0 69.6 74.0 72.9 73.3 60.7 68.6 53.4 54.9
AUC scores 56.4 57.3 49.6 50.9 53.6 53.4 50.5 45.6 48.0 40.5 38.7

the ACFN [50] tracker achieved good tracking results for illu-
mination variation (matrix) and fast motion (skiing). In other
sequences, its tracking performance still had considerable space
for improvement. From these tracking results, we can see that
when the tracking target is affected by complex scenes such as
fast motion, background clutter, motion blur, etc., other trackers
may quickly lose the target (motorRolling, matrix, and skating1),
but our tracker is still able to locate it faultlessly. Unlike the con-
trast trackers, benefit from the target-focusing loss function, our
TFCR tracker can handle fast motion, scale variation, illumination
variation, deformation, and other challenges very well.
4.5. Experiment on TC-128
In this section, we use the TC-128 [66] dataset to validate
the performance of our TFCR tracker. The comparison with sev-
eral state-of-the-art trackers (C-COT [64], BACF [5], SRDCF [11],
DeepSRDCF [13], SRDCFdecon [33], STResNet_CF [61], CFNet [70],
HDT [43], DSST [58] and KCF [1]) is shown in Table 2. Among
the 10 compared trackers, C–COT [64] obtains the best precision
score (78.3%) and the best success score (57.3%). By comparison,
our TFCR tracker acquired the second-best (very close to C–COT)
with a distance precision rate of 77.6% and an overlap success rate
of 56.4%, respectively. Compared with DeepSRDCF [13], which
obtained the third-best precision score (74.0%) and success score
(53.6%), our proposed TFCR achieved significant improvements,
which shows clearly the benefits of using a target-focusing loss
function.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, we propose a target-focusing convolutional re-
gression model for object tracking. In our proposed TFCR tracker,
a novel target-focusing loss strategy was proposed to balance
the disequilibrium of the positive and negative samples by re-
ducing the effect of the negative samples and maximizing the
response of the target sample. Compared with the DCFs-based
trackers, our proposed TRCF tracker could incorporate essentially
limitless authentic negative samples from the video image and
acquired a more clean response map through correlation filters.
Extensive experimental results showed that our TFCR tracker was
more effective and robust than DCFs-based trackers and even

Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx
some CNN-based trackers. Moreover, the target-focusing strategy
showed attractive potential for visual tracking tasks, such as
further improved tracking accuracy with more effective depth
tracking frameworks.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Di Yuan: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - original
draft, Writing - review & editing, Formal analysis, Software, In-
vestigation. Nana Fan: Software, Validation, Visualization, Inves-
tigation, Resources, Data curation. Zhenyu He: Writing - review
& editing, Supervision, Project administration.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (Grant No. 61672183), by the Natural Science
Foundation of Guangdong Province (Grant No. 2015A030313544),
by the Shenzhen Research Council (Grant No.
JCYJ20170413104556946, JCYJ20170815113552036), and by the
project ‘‘PCL Future Greater-Bay Area Network facilities for Large-
scale Experiments and Applications" (PCL2018KP001) and ‘‘The
Verification Platform of Multi-tier Coverage Communication Net-
work for Oceans (PCL2018KP002)’’. Di Yuan is supported by a
scholarship from China Scholarship Council (CSC).
References
[1] J.F. Henriques, R. Caseiro, P. Martins, J. Batista, High-speed tracking with
kernelized correlation filters, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 37 (3)
(2014) 583–596.
[2] M. Danelljan, G. Bhat, F.S. Khan, M. Felsberg, Eco: Efficient convolution
operators for tracking, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern
Recognition, 2017, pp. 6638–6646.
[3] N. Fan, J. Li, Z. He, C. Zhang, X. Li, Region-filtering correlation tracking,
Knowl.-Based Syst. 172 (2019) 95–103.
[4] F. Li, C. Tian, W. Zuo, L. Zhang, M.-H. Yang, Learning spatial-temporal
regularized correlation filters for visual tracking, in: IEEE Conference on
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp. 4904–4913.
[5] H.K. Galoogahi, A. Fagg, S. Lucey, Learning background-aware correlation
filters for visual tracking, in: IEEE International Conference on Computer
Vision, 2017, pp. 1135–1143.
[6] X. Li, C. Ma, B. Wu, Z. He, M.-H. Yang, Target-aware deep tracking, in:
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2019, pp.
1369–1378.
[7] Y. Song, C. Ma, L. Gong, J. Zhang, R.W. Lau, M.-H. Yang, Crest: Convolutional
residual learning for visual tracking, in: IEEE International Conference on
Computer Vision, 2017, pp. 2574–2583.
[8] C. Sun, H. Lu, M.-H. Yang, Learning spatial-aware regressions for visual
tracking, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,
2018, pp. 8962–8970.
[9] K. Chen, W. Tao, Convolutional regression for visual tracking, IEEE Trans.
Image Process. 27 (7) (2018) 3611–3620.
[10] D. Held, S. Thrun, S. Savarese, Learning to track at 100 fps with deep
regression networks, in: European Conference on Computer Vision, 2016,
pp. 749–765.
[11] M. Danelljan, G. Hager, F.S. Khan, M. Felsberg, Learning spatially regular-
ized correlation filters for visual tracking, in: IEEE International Conference
on Computer Vision, 2015, pp. 4310–4318.
[12] J.F. Henriques, C. Rui, P. Martins, J. Batista, Exploiting the circulant
structure of tracking-by-detection with kernels, in: European Conference
on Computer Vision, 2012, pp. 702–715.
[13] M. Danelljan, G. Hager, F.S. Khan, M. Felsberg, Convolutional features for
correlation filter based visual tracking, in: IEEE International Conference
on Computer Vision Workshops, 2015, pp. 621–629.
[14] X. Li, Q. Liu, Z. He, H. Wang, C. Zhang, W.S. Chen, A multi-view model for
visual tracking via correlation filters, Knowl.-Based Syst. 113 (2016) 88–99.
[15] D. Yuan, X. Lu, D. Li, Y. Liang, X. Zhang, Particle filter re-detection for
visual tracking via correlation filters, Multimedia Tools Appl. 78 (11) (2019)
14277–14301.
[16] S. Yi, Z. He, Y.M. Cheung, W.S. Chen, Unified sparse subspace learning via
self-contained regression, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. 28 (10)
(2018) 2537–2550.
Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
9
[17] T.-Y. Lin, P. Goyal, R. Girshick, K. He, P. Dollár, Focal loss for dense object
detection, in: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, 2017, pp.
2999–3007.
[18] Y. Zhao, X. You, S. Yu, C. Xu, W. Yuan, X.Y. Jing, T. Zhang, D. Tao, Multi-
view manifold learning with locality alignment, Pattern Recognit. 78 (2018)
154–166.
[19] A. Shrivastava, A. Gupta, R. Girshick, Training region-based object detectors
with online hard example mining, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision
and Pattern Recognition, 2016, pp. 761–769.
[20] S. Yi, Y. Liang, Z. He, Y. Li, Y.-m. Cheung, Dual pursuit for subspace learning,
IEEE Trans. Multimedia 21 (6) (2018) 1399–1411.
[21] P.F. Felzenszwalb, R.B. Girshick, D. McAllester, Cascade object detection
with deformable part models, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision
and Pattern Recognition, 2010, pp. 2241–2248.
[22] Z. He, X. Li, D. Tao, X. You, Y.Y. Tang, Connected component model for
multi-object tracking, IEEE Trans. Image Process. 25 (8) (2016) 3698–3711.
[23] P. Zhang, S. Yu, J. Xu, X. You, X. Jiang, X.-Y. Jing, D. Tao, Robust visual track-
ing using multi-frame multi-feature joint modeling, IEEE Trans. Circuits
Syst. Video Technol. 29 (12) (2019) 3673–3686.
[24] M. Mueller, N. Smith, B. Ghanem, Context-aware correlation filter tracking,
in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2017, pp.
1387–1395.
[25] D.S. Bolme, J.R. Beveridge, B.A. Draper, Y.M. Lui, Visual object tracking using
adaptive correlation filters, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, 2010, pp. 2544–2550.
[26] M. Danelljan, F.S. Khan, M. Felsberg, J.V.D. Weijer, Adaptive color attributes
for real-time visual tracking, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, 2014, pp. 1090–1097.
[27] T. Liu, G. Wang, Q. Yang, Real-time part-based visual tracking via adaptive
correlation filters, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern
Recognition, 2015, pp. 4902–4912.
[28] Y. Li, J. Zhu, S.C.H. Hoi, Reliable patch trackers: Robust visual tracking by
exploiting reliable patches, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, 2015, pp. 353–361.
[29] S. Liu, T. Zhang, X. Cao, C. Xu, Structural correlation filter for robust visual
tracking, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,
2016, pp. 4312–4320.
[30] T. Liu, X. Cao, J. Jiang, Visual object tracking with partition loss schemes,
IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 18 (3) (2017) 633–642.
[31] D. Yuan, X. Zhang, J. Liu, D. Li, A multiple feature fused model for visual
object tracking via correlation filters, Multimedia Tools Appl. 78 (19)
(2019) 27271–27290.
[32] H.K. Galoogahi, T. Sim, S. Lucey, Correlation filters with limited boundaries,
in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2015, pp.
4630–4638.
[33] M. Danelljan, G. Hager, F.S. Khan, M. Felsberg, Adaptive decontamination
of the training set: A unified formulation for discriminative visual tracking,
in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2016, pp.
1430–1438.
[34] A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, G.E. Hinton, Imagenet classification with deep
convolutional neural networks, in: International Conference on Neural
Information Processing Systems, 2012, pp. 1097–1105.
[35] Y. Liu, X. Chen, J. Cheng, H. Peng, Z. Wang, Infrared and visible image
fusion with convolutional neural networks, Int. J. Wavelets Multiresolut.
Inf. Process. 16 (3) (2018) 1850018.
[36] C. Tian, Y. Xu, W. Zuo, Image denoising using deep cnn with batch
renormalization, Neural Netw. 121 (2020) 461–473.
[37] B. Liu, Q. Liu, Z. Zhu, T. Zhang, Y. Yang, Msst-resnet: Deep multi-scale
spatiotemporal features for robust visual object tracking, Knowl.-Based
Syst. 164 (2019) 235–252.
[38] K. Wang, J. An, X. Zhao, J. Zou, Accurate landmarking from 3d facial scans
by cnn and cascade regression, Int. J. Wavelets Multiresolut. Inf. Process.
16 (6) (2018) 1840007.
[39] K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, J. Sun, Deep residual learning for image recognition,
in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2016, pp.
770–778.
[40] H. Li, Y. Li, F. Porikli, Deeptrack: Learning discriminative feature represen-
tations by convolutional neural networks for visual tracking, in: British
Machine Vision Conference, 2014, pp. 1–12.
[41] B. Liu, Q. Liu, T. Zhang, Y. Yang, Msstresnet-tld: A robust tracking
method based on tracking-learning-detection framework by using multi-
scale spatio-temporal residual network feature model, Neurocomputing
362 (2019) 175–194.
[42] H. Nam, B. Han, Learning multi-domain convolutional neural networks
for visual tracking, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern
Recognition, 2016, pp. 4293–4302.
[43] Y. Qi, S. Zhang, L. Qin, H. Yao, Q. Huang, J. Lim, M.H. Yang, Hedged deep
tracking, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,
2016, pp. 4303–4311.
10 D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He / Knowledge-Based Systems xxx (xxxx) xxx
[44] R. Tao, E. Gavves, A.W.M. Smeulders, Siamese instance search for tracking,
in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2016,
pp. 1420–1429.
[45] J. Valmadre, L. Bertinetto, J. Henriques, A. Vedaldi, P.H.S. Torr, End-
to-end representation learning for correlation filter based tracking, in:
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2017, pp.
2085–2813.
[46] J. Fan, Y. Wu, S. Dai, Discriminative spatial attention for robust tracking,
in: European Conference on Computer Vision, 2010, pp. 480–493.
[47] Z. Cui, S. Xiao, J. Feng, S. Yan, Recurrently target-attending tracking, in:
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2016, pp.
1449–1458.
[48] J. Choi, H.J. Chang, J. Jeong, Y. Demiris, Y.C. Jin, Visual tracking using
attention-modulated disintegration and integration, in: IEEE Conference on
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2016, pp. 4321–4330.
[49] H. Fan, H. Ling, Sanet: Structure-aware network for visual tracking, in:
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops,
2017, pp. 2217–2224.
[50] J. Choi, H.J. Chang, S. Yun, T. Fischer, Y. Demiris, Y.C. Jin, Attentional
correlation filter network for adaptive visual tracking, in: IEEE Conference
on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2017, pp. 4828–4837.
[51] Z. Zhu, W. Wu, W. Zou, J. Yan, End-to-end flow correlation tracking with
spatial-temporal attention, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp. 548–557.
[52] Q. Wang, Z. Teng, J. Xing, J. Gao, W. Hu, S. Maybank, Learning attentions:
Residual attentional siamese network for high performance online visual
tracking, in: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,
2018, pp. 4854–4863.
[53] Q. Liu, X. Lu, Z. He, C. Zhang, W.S. Chen, Deep convolutional neural
networks for thermal infrared object tracking, Knowl.-Based Syst. (2017)
189–198.
[54] Z. He, S. Yi, Y.M. Cheung, X. You, Y.Y. Tang, Robust object tracking via key
patch sparse representation, IEEE Trans. Cybern. 47 (2) (2017) 354–364.
[55] K. Simonyan, A. Zisserman, Very deep convolutional networks for
large-scale image recognition, in: International Conference on Learning
Representations, 2015, pp. 1–14.
[56] Z. Kalal, K. Mikolajczyk, J. Matas, Tracking-learning-detection, IEEE Trans.
Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 34 (7) (2012) 1409–1422.
[57] W. Ou, D. Yuan, Q. Liu, Y. Cao, Object tracking based on online represen-
tative sample selection via non-negative least square, Multimedia Tools
Appl. 77 (9) (2018) 10569–10587.
Please cite this article as: D. Yuan, N. Fan and Z. He, Learning target-focusing convolutional regression model for visual object tracking, Knowledge-Based Systems (2020)
105526, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105526.
[58] M. Danelljan, G. Häger, F.S. Khan, M. Felsberg, Discriminative scale space
tracking, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 39 (8) (2016) 1561–1575.
[59] L. Chen, X. Hu, T. Xu, H. Kuang, Q. Li, Turn signal detection during
nighttime by cnn detector and perceptual hashing tracking, IEEE Trans.
Intell. Transp. Syst. 18 (12) (2017) 3303–3314.
[60] L. Bertinetto, J. Valmadre, J.F. Henriques, A. Vedaldi, P.H.S. Torr,
Fully-convolutional siamese networks for object tracking, in: European
Conference on Computer Vision, 2016, pp. 850–865.
[61] Z. Zhu, B. Liu, Y. Rao, Q. Liu, R. Zhang, Stresnet_cf tracker: The deep
spatiotemporal features learning for correlation filter based robust visual
object tracking, IEEE Access 7 (2019) 30142–30156.
[62] K. Zhang, Q. Liu, Y. Wu, M.H. Yang, Robust visual tracking via convolutional
networks without training, IEEE Trans. Image Process. 25 (4) (2016)
1779–1792.
[63] S. Yun, J. Choi, Y. Yoo, K. Yun, Y.C. Jin, Action-decision networks for
visual tracking with deep reinforcement learning, in: IEEE Conference on
Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2017, pp. 1349–1358.
[64] M. Danelljan, A. Robinson, F.S. Khan, M. Felsberg, Beyond correlation filters:
Learning continuous convolution operators for visual tracking, in: European
Conference on Computer Vision, 2016, pp. 472–488.
[65] Y. Wu, J. Lim, M.H. Yang, Online object tracking: A benchmark, in:
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2013, pp.
2411–2418.
[66] P. Liang, E. Blasch, H. Ling, Encoding color information for visual tracking:
Algorithms and benchmark., IEEE Trans. Image Process. 24 (12) (2015)
5630–5644.
[67] Y. Wu, J. Lim, M.H. Yang, Object tracking benchmark, IEEE Trans. Pattern
Anal. Mach. Intell. 37 (9) (2015) 1834–1848.
[68] Q. Liu, Z. He, X. Li, Y. Zheng, Ptb-tir: A thermal infrared pedestrian tracking
benchmark, IEEE Trans. Multimed. (2019) http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMM.
2019.2932615.
[69] M. Everingham, J. Winn, The pascal visual object classes challenge 2010
(voc2010) development kit contents, in: International Conference on
Machine Learning, 2011, pp. 117–176.
[70] J. Valmadre, L. Bertinetto, J. Henriques, A. Vedaldi, P.H. Torr, End-to-
end representation learning for correlation filter based tracking, in:
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2017, pp.
2805–2813.