Greedy and $K$-Greedy Algorithms for Multidimensional Data Association
IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems (Impact Factor: 1.76). 08/2011; 47(3):1915 - 1925. DOI: 10.1109/TAES.2011.5937273
Source: IEEE Xplore
The multidimensional assignment (MDA) problem is a combinatorial optimization problem arising in many applications, for instance multitarget tracking (MTT). The objective of an MDA problem of dimension d ∈ N is to match groups of d objects in such a way that each measurement is associated with at most one track and each track is associated with at most one measurement from each list, optimizing a certain objective function. It is well known that the MDA problem is NP-hard for d ≥ 3. In this paper five new polynomial time heuristics to solve the MDA problem arising in MTT are presented. They are all based on the semi-greedy approach introduced in earlier research. Experimental results on the accuracy and speed of the proposed algorithms in MTT problems are provided.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This paper shows the results of two different methods of implementing the semi-greedy auction algorithm for hypothesis selection in the multiple hypothesis radar data association problem. The goal is to compare the Semi-Greedy Track Selection (SGTS) technique proposed by Waard, Capponi et. al. to a traditional semi-greedy approach , , , , , . This study uses detection data generated by a medium-fidelity digital simulation of targets and sensors passed through the developed multiple hypothesis system. The results show that there is a crossover point at 8 solution sets for simplistic scenarios and a crossover point of 3 solution sets for more complex scenarios. This result would suggest that implementations where more than 8 solution sets in the semi-greedy approach are to be considered, the traditional semi-greedy approach is favorable. In problems where less than 3 solution sets are to be considered, the SGTS method provides better performance.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.