Track Coalescence and Repulsion in Multitarget Tracking: An Analysis of MHT, JPDA, and Belief Propagation Methods

被引:0
作者
Kropfreiter, Thomas [1 ,2 ]
Meyer, Florian [1 ,2 ]
Crouse, David F. [3 ]
Coraluppi, Stefano [4 ]
Hlawatsch, Franz [5 ]
Willett, Peter [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Diego, Scripps Inst Oceanog, La Jolla, CA 92037 USA
[2] Univ Calif San Diego, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, La Jolla, CA 92037 USA
[3] Naval Res Lab, Washington, DC 20375 USA
[4] Syst & Technol Res, Woburn, MA 01801 USA
[5] TU Wien, Inst Telecommun, A-1040 Vienna, Austria
[6] Univ Connecticut, Dept Elect & Comp Engn, Storrs, CT 06269 USA
来源
IEEE OPEN JOURNAL OF SIGNAL PROCESSING | 2024年 / 5卷
基金
奥地利科学基金会;
关键词
Target tracking; Vectors; Probabilistic logic; Filtering algorithms; Estimation; Electronic mail; Probability density function; Multitarget tracking; joint probabilistic data association; JPDA; multiple hypothesis tracking; MHT; belief propagation; track coalescence; track repulsion; PROBABILISTIC DATA ASSOCIATION; RELAXATION ALGORITHM; ASSIGNMENT PROBLEMS; TARGETS; EFFICIENT; FILTER; JIPDA;
D O I
10.1109/OJSP.2024.3451167
中图分类号
TM [电工技术]; TN [电子技术、通信技术];
学科分类号
0808 ; 0809 ;
摘要
Joint probabilistic data association (JPDA) filter methods and multiple hypothesis tracking (MHT) methods are widely used for multitarget tracking (MTT). However, they are known to exhibit undesirable behavior in tracking scenarios with targets in close proximity: JPDA filter methods suffer from the track coalescence effect, i.e., the estimated tracks of targets in close proximity tend to merge and can become indistinguishable, while MHT methods suffer from an opposite effect known as track repulsion, i.e., the estimated tracks of targets in close proximity tend to repel each other in the sense that their separation is larger than the actual distance between the targets. In this paper, we review the JPDA filter and MHT methods and discuss the track coalescence and track repulsion effects. We also consider a more recent methodology for MTT that is based on the belief propagation (BP) algorithm. We argue that BP-based MTT does not exhibit track repulsion because it is not based on maximum a posteriori estimation, and that it exhibits significantly reduced track coalescence because certain properties of the BP messages related to data association encourage separation of target state estimates. Our theoretical arguments are confirmed by numerical results for four representative simulation scenarios.
引用
收藏
页码:1089 / 1106
页数:18
相关论文
共 76 条
[1]  
Bar-Shalom Y., 2002, ESTIMATION APPL TRAC
[2]  
Bar-Shalom Y., 1990, MULTITARGET MULTISEN, VI.
[3]  
Bar-Shalom Y., 1974, PROC 5 S NONLINEAR E, P16
[4]  
Bar-Shalom Y., 2011, Tracking and Data Fusion: A Handbook of Algorithms
[5]   The Probabilistic Data Association Filter ESTIMATION IN THE PRESENCE OF MEASUREMENT ORIGIN UNCERTAINTY [J].
Bar-Shalom, Yaakov ;
Daum, Fred ;
Huang, Jim .
IEEE CONTROL SYSTEMS MAGAZINE, 2009, 29 (06) :82-100
[6]  
Bar-Shalom Yaakov., 1998, Estimation and tracking: Principles, techniques and software
[7]  
Bertsekas D., 1991, LINEAR NETWORK OPTIM
[8]   Multiple hypothesis tracking for multiple target tracking [J].
Blackman, SS .
IEEE AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS MAGAZINE, 2004, 19 (01) :5-18
[9]   Probabilistic data association avoiding track coalescence [J].
Blom, HAP ;
Bloem, EA .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL, 2000, 45 (02) :247-259
[10]   JIPDA*: Automatic Target Tracking Avoiding Track Coalescence [J].
Blom, Henk A. P. ;
Bloem, Edwin A. ;
Musicki, Darko .
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS, 2015, 51 (02) :962-974