Skip to content

Conversation

@kotchin
Copy link

@kotchin kotchin commented Mar 8, 2014

The proposed change is to the function called FerNNClassifier::getFeatures().
Originally, the function was :

for (int t=0;t<nstructs;t++){
leaf=0;
for (int f=0; f<structSize; f++){
leaf = (leaf << 1) + features[scale_idx]t*nstructs+f;
}
fern[t]=leaf;
}

With nstructs = 10 and structSize = 13.

The issue comes from the indexes in the features function where leaf is updated. They are in reverse order. This means that not all features from 0 to 129 are used, instead only features from 0 to t_nstructs+f = 9_10 + 13 = 103 are used. We still have 130 bits in the leaf variable because some are used several times. So the algorithm relies on 104 features instead of the intended 130 which decreases the performance of it.
This correction increases the tracking performance significantly without having any impact on required processing power since the extra features we are now using are already calculated, just not used until now.

I hope I was able to improve the project.

Sincerely,
Alex

The proposed change is to the function called FerNNClassifier::getFeatures().
Originally, the function was :

  for (int t=0;t<nstructs;t++){
    leaf=0;
    for (int f=0; f<structSize; f++){
      leaf = (leaf << 1) + features[scale_idx][t*nstructs+f](image);
    }
    fern[t]=leaf;
  }

With nstructs = 10 and structSize = 13.

The issue comes from the indexes in the features function where leaf is updated. They are in reverse order. This means that not all features from 0 to 129 are used, instead only features from 0 to t*nstructs+f = 9*10 + 13 = 103 are used. We still have 130 bits in the leaf variable because some are used several times. So the algorithm relies on 104 features instead of the intended 130 which decreases the performance of it.
This correction increases the tracking performance significantly without having any impact on required processing power since the extra features we are now using are already calculated, just not used until now. 

I hope I was able to improve the project. 

Sincerely,
Alex
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant