The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reidentification by Relative Distance Comparison
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Person re-identification by Local Maximal Occurrence representation and metric learning
Liao, S., Hu, Y., Zhu, X., & Li, S. Z. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2015.7298832 · Cited by 2,091
Harmonious Attention Network for Person Re-identification
Li, W., Zhu, X., & Gong, S. (2018) · 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00243 · Cited by 1,449
Self-citationA Discriminatively Learned CNN Embedding for Person Reidentification
Zheng, Z., Zheng, L., & Yang, Y. (2018) · ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications · doi:10.1145/3159171 · Cited by 874
ABD-Net: Attentive but Diverse Person Re-Identification
Chen, T., Ding, S., Xie, J., Yuan, Y., Chen, W., Yang, Y., Ren, Z., & Wang, Z. (2019) · 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2019.00844 · Cited by 561
Person Re-identification by Salience Matching
Zhao, R., Ouyang, W., & Wang, X. (2013) · 2013 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision · doi:10.1109/iccv.2013.314 · Cited by 466
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.