Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 719

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Reidentification by Relative Distance Comparison

Wei-Shi Zheng, Shaogang Gong, Tao Xiang·2013·IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence

Abstract

Matching people across nonoverlapping camera views at different locations and different times, known as person reidentification, is both a hard and important problem for associating behavior of people observed in a large distributed space over a prolonged period of time. Person reidentification is fundamentally challenging because of the large visual appearance changes caused by variations in view angle, lighting, background clutter, and occlusion. To address these challenges, most previous approaches aim to model and extract distinctive and reliable visual features. However, seeking an optimal and robust similarity measure that quantifies a wide range of features against realistic viewing conditions from a distance is still an open and unsolved problem for person reidentification. In this paper, we formulate person reidentification as a relative distance comparison (RDC) learning problem in order to learn the optimal similarity measure between a pair of person images. This approach avoids treating all features indiscriminately and does not assume the existence of some universally distinctive and reliable features. To that end, a novel relative distance comparison model is introduced. The model is formulated to maximize the likelihood of a pair of true matches having a relatively smaller distance than that of a wrong match pair in a soft discriminant manner. Moreover, in order to maintain the tractability of the model in large scale learning, we further develop an ensemble RDC model. Extensive experiments on three publicly available benchmarking datasets are carried out to demonstrate the clear superiority of the proposed RDC models over related popular person reidentification techniques. The results also show that the new RDC models are more robust against visual appearance changes and less susceptible to model overfitting compared to other related existing models.

Overview

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/tpami.2012.138

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 719

Metadata

Authors
Zheng, W.-S., Gong, S., & Xiang, T.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
Published
2013-03
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
653-668
ISSN
  • 0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
  • 2160-9292
OpenAlex
W2089074647
Cited by
719
References
0
FWCI
52.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reidentification by Relative Distance Comparison. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tpami.2012.138
The paper
Zheng, W.-S., Gong, S., & Xiang, T. (2013). Reidentification by Relative Distance Comparison. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1109/tpami.2012.138

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.