Comparison of two 3D tracking paradigms for freely flying insects

Benjamin Risse, Dimitri Berh, Junli Tao, Xiaoyi Jiang, Reinhard Klette, Christian Klämbt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss and compare state-of-the-art 3D tracking paradigms for flying insects such as Drosophila melanogaster. If two cameras are employed to estimate the trajectories of these identical appearing objects, calculating stereo and temporal correspondences leads to an N P -hard assignment problem. Currently, there are two different types of approaches discussed in the literature: probabilistic approaches and global correspondence selection approaches. Both have advantages and limitations in terms of accuracy and complexity. Here, we present algorithms for both paradigms. The probabilistic approach utilizes the Kalman filter for temporal tracking. The correspondence selection approach calculates the trajectories based on an overall cost function. Limitations of both approaches are addressed by integrating a third camera to verify consistency of the stereo pairings and to reduce the complexity of the global selection. Furthermore, a novel greedy optimization scheme is introduced for the correspondence selection approach. We compare both paradigms based on synthetic data with ground truth availability. Results show that the global selection is more accurate, while the previously proposed tracking-by-matching (probabilistic) approach is causal and feasible for longer tracking periods and very high target densities. We further demonstrate that our extended global selection scheme outperforms current correspondence selection approaches in tracking accuracy and tracking time.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-13
Number of pages13
JournalEurasip journal on image and video processing
Volume2013
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of two 3D tracking paradigms for freely flying insects'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this