Cited by 1,591Video Surveillance and Tracking MethodsAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

ATOM: Accurate Tracking by Overlap Maximization

Open access
Danelljan, Martin, Bhat, Goutam, Khan, Fahad Shahbaz, Felsberg, Michael·2019·2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Abstract

While recent years have witnessed astonishing improvements in visual tracking robustness, the advancements in tracking accuracy have been limited. As the focus has been directed towards the development of powerful classifiers, the problem of accurate target state estimation has been largely overlooked. In fact, most trackers resort to a simple multi-scale search in order to estimate the target bounding box. We argue that this approach is fundamentally limited since target estimation is a complex task, requiring high-level knowledge about the object. We address this problem by proposing a novel tracking architecture, consisting of dedicated target estimation and classification components. High level knowledge is incorporated into the target estimation through extensive offline learning. Our target estimation component is trained to predict the overlap between the target object and an estimated bounding box. By carefully integrating target-specific information, our approach achieves previously unseen bounding box accuracy. We further introduce a classification component that is trained online to guarantee high discriminative power in the presence of distractors. Our final tracking framework sets a new state-of-the-art on five challenging benchmarks. On the new large-scale TrackingNet dataset, our tracker ATOM achieves a relative gain of 15% over the previous best approach, while running at over 30 FPS. Code and models are available at https://github.com/visionml/pytracking.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2019.00479

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous long-term tracking methods usually consist of multiple components, such as base trackers, target verification modules, and global detectors.

    “Specifically, previous methods usually consist of multiple components, such as base trackers [9, 50], target verification modules [21], and global detectors [40, 19].”

    From Learning Spatio-Temporal Transformer for Visual Tracking (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

    The citation is attached to “global detectors.” ATOM instead describes a target classification module and a target estimation module (Proposed Method, §3), and says it extracts features at the previously estimated target location during tracking (Online Tracking Approach, §3.3). Our copy therefore describes local tracking, not ATOM as a global detector. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • For most popular trackers, correlation plays a critical role in integrating the template or target information into the regions of interest.

    “For most of the popular trackers (such as SiamFC [1], SiamRPN [22], and ATOM [9]), correlation plays a critical role in integrating the template or target information into the regions of interest (ROI).”

    From Transformer Tracking (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

    The Related Work section says correlation-based trackers are popular, supporting the general background claim. But ATOM’s Target Estimation section says it incorporates reference-target information into candidate regions through channel-wise modulation of pooled features, not correlation. Thus the cited paper does not support describing correlation as ATOM’s mechanism for that step; our copy gives no page number for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Previous Siamese trackers only exploit spatial information for tracking, while online methods use historical predictions for model updates.

    “Previous Siamese trackers [25, 51, 14, 6] only exploit the spatial information for tracking, while online methods [54, 57, 9, 3] use historical predictions for model updates.”

    From Learning Spatio-Temporal Transformer for Visual Tracking (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

  • LTMU B takes the combination of ATOM and SiamMask as the short-term tracker, MDNet as the verifier, and GlobalTrack as the global detector.

    “To be specific, LTMU B takes the combination of ATOM [9] and SiamMask [50] as the short-term tracker, MDNet [37] as the verifier, and GlobalTrack [19] as the global detector.”

    From Learning Spatio-Temporal Transformer for Visual Tracking (2021) · cites this paper as [9]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. L. Bertinetto, J. Valmadre, S. Golodetz, O. Miksik, and P. H. S. Torr. Staple: Complementary learners for real-time tracking. In CVPR, 2016. 8
  2. G. Bhat, J. Johnander, M. Danelljan, F. S. Khan, and M. Fels- berg. Unveiling the power of deep tracking. In ECCV, 2018. 1, 2, 6, 8
  3. M. Danelljan, G. Häger, F. S. Khan, and M. Felsberg. Dis- criminative scale space tracking. TPAMI, 39(8):1561-1575, 2017.
  4. M. Danelljan, G. Häger, F. Shahbaz Khan, and M. Felsberg. Learning spatially regularized correlation filters for visual tracking. In ICCV, 2015. 1, 2
  5. M. Danelljan, A. Robinson, F. Khan, and M. Felsberg. Be- yond correlation filters: Learning continuous convolution operators for visual tracking. In ECCV, 2016. 2, 5, 8, 12
  6. H. K. Galoogahi, A. Fagg, C. Huang, D. Ramanan, and S. Lucey. Need for speed: A benchmark for higher frame rate object tracking. In ICCV, 2017. 2, 6, 7, 8, 11
  7. Q. Guo, W. Feng, C. Zhou, R. Huang, L. Wan, and S. Wang. Learning dynamic siamese network for visual object track- ing. In ICCV, 2017. 8
  8. A. He, C. Luo, X. Tian, and W. Zeng. Towards a better match in siamese network based visual object tracker. In ECCV workshop, 2018. 8
  9. P. Jaccard. The distribution of the flora in the alpine zone. New Phytologist, 11(2):37-50, 1912. 2
  10. B. Jiang, R. Luo, J. Mao, T. Xiao, and Y. Jiang. Acquisition of localization confidence for accurate object detection. In ECCV, 2018. 2, 3, 5
  11. D. P. Kingma and J. Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In ICLR, 2014. 5
  12. M. Kristan, A. Leonardis, J. Matas, M. Felsberg, R. Pfugfelder, L. C. Zajc, T. Vojir, G. Bhat, A. Lukezic, A. Eldesokey, G. Fernandez, and et al. The sixth visual ob- ject tracking vot2018 challenge results. In ECCV workshop, 2018. 1, 2, 6, 8
  13. B. Li, J. Yan, W. Wu, Z. Zhu, and X. Hu. High performance visual tracking with siamese region proposal network. In CVPR, 2018. 2, 6, 8
  14. F. Li, C. Tian, W. Zuo, L. Zhang, and M. Yang. Learn- ing spatial-temporal regularized correlation filters for visual tracking. In CVPR, 2018. 8
  15. Y. Li and J. Zhu. A scale adaptive kernel correlation filter tracker with feature integration. In ECCV workshop, 2014. 2, 8
  16. T. Lin, M. Maire, S. J. Belongie, L. D. Bourdev, R. B. Gir- shick, J. Hays, P. Perona, D. Ramanan, P. Dollár, and C. L. Zitnick. Microsoft COCO: common objects in context. In ECCV, 2014. 4, 12
  17. A. Lukezic, T. Vojír, L. C. Zajc, J. Matas, and M. Kris- tan. Discriminative correlation filter tracker with channel and spatial reliability. IJCV, 126(7):671-688, 2018. 1, 8
  18. C. Ma, J.-B. Huang, X. Yang, and M.-H. Yang. Hierarchical convolutional features for visual tracking. In ICCV, 2015. 2
  19. M. Mueller, N. Smith, and B. Ghanem. A benchmark and simulator for uav tracking. In ECCV, 2016. 2, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13
  20. M. Müller, A. Bibi, S. Giancola, S. Al-Subaihi, and B. Ghanem. Trackingnet: A large-scale dataset and bench- mark for object tracking in the wild. In ECCV, 2018. 2, 4, 6, 8, 12
  21. H. Nam and B. Han. Learning multi-domain convolutional neural networks for visual tracking. In CVPR, 2016. 2, 6, 8
  22. E. Real, J. Shlens, S. Mazzocchi, X. Pan, and V. Vanhoucke. Youtube-boundingboxes: A large high-precision human- annotated data set for object detection in video. CVPR, 2017. 13
  23. J. Redmon and A. Farhadi. Yolo9000: Better, faster, stronger. In CVPR, 2017. 3
  24. S. Ren, K. He, R. B. Girshick, and J. Sun. Faster R-CNN: towards real-time object detection with region proposal net- works. In NIPS, 2015. 3
  25. Y. Song, C. Ma, X. Wu, L. Gong, L. Bao, W. Zuo, C. Shen, R. W. H. Lau, and M.-H. Yang. VITAL: Visual tracking via adversarial learning. In CVPR, 2018. 8
  26. C. Sun, D. Wang, H. Lu, and M. Yang. Correlation tracking via joint discrimination and reliability learning. In CVPR, 2018. 1, 5, 8
  27. R. Tao, E. Gavves, and A. W. M. Smeulders. Siamese in- stance search for tracking. In CVPR, 2016. 8
  28. J. Valmadre, L. Bertinetto, J. F. Henriques, A. Vedaldi, and P. H. S. Torr. End-to-end representation learning for correla- tion filter based tracking. In CVPR, 2017. 1, 8, 12
  29. T. Xu, Z. Feng, X. Wu, and J. Kittler. Learning adaptive dis- criminative correlation filters via temporal consistency pre- serving spatial feature selection for robust visual tracking. CoRR, abs/1807.11348, 2018. 8 · arXiv
  30. Y. Yao, X. Wu, S. Shan, and W. Zuo. Joint representation and truncated inference learning for correlation filter based tracking. In ECCV, 2018. 12
  31. J. Zhang, S. Ma, and S. Sclaroff. MEEM: robust tracking via multiple experts using entropy minimization. In ECCV, 2014. 1
  32. Y. Zhang, L. Wang, J. Qi, D. K. Wang, M. Feng, and H. Lu. Structured siamese network for real-time visual tracking. In ECCV, 2018. 8
  33. Z. Zhu, Q. Wang, L. Bo, W. Wu, J. Yan, and W. Hu. Distractor-aware siamese networks for visual object track- ing. In ECCV, 2018. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 13

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Danelljan, M., Bhat, G., Khan, F. S., & Felsberg, M.
Affiliations
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Inception Institute of Artificial Intelligence (AE)
  • Linköping University (SE)
Venue
2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2019-06
Pages
4655-4664
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2901751835
Cited by
1,591
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 88 · 2025: 200 · 2024: 296 · 2023: 311 · 2022: 294 · 2021: 230 · 2020: 147 · 2019: 25
FWCI
56.73
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Vetenskapsrådet (2018-04673, 2018-)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Video Surveillance and Tracking Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
visual object tracking, target state estimation, bounding box estimation, online classification, offline learning, real-time tracking

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review