• Chinese Optics Letters
  • Vol. 20, Issue 8, 081101 (2022)
Zhenqi Liang1, Jingshi Wang1、2, Gang Xiao1、*, and Liu Zeng1
Author Affiliations
  • 1School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China
  • 2Jiangsu Automation Research Institute, Lianyungang 222061, China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/COL202220.081101 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Zhenqi Liang, Jingshi Wang, Gang Xiao, Liu Zeng. FAANet: feature-aligned attention network for real-time multiple object tracking in UAV videos[J]. Chinese Optics Letters, 2022, 20(8): 081101 Copy Citation Text show less
    Architecture of our tracker FAANet tracking framework. This framework contains four components: backbone (RepVGG), neck (CSA + FAA), head (Re-ID + detection), and association.
    Fig. 1. Architecture of our tracker FAANet tracking framework. This framework contains four components: backbone (RepVGG), neck (CSA + FAA), head (Re-ID + detection), and association.
    Architecture of CSA module.
    Fig. 2. Architecture of CSA module.
    Architecture of FAA module.
    Fig. 3. Architecture of FAA module.
    Procedure of association between detections and tracklets.
    Fig. 4. Procedure of association between detections and tracklets.
    Structural re-parameterization of a RepVGG block.
    Fig. 5. Structural re-parameterization of a RepVGG block.
    MOTA-IDF1-FPS comparison with other UAV-based MOT trackers on the UAVDT test dataset. The horizontal axis is FPS, the vertical axis is MOTA, and the radius of the circle is IDF1.
    Fig. 6. MOTA-IDF1-FPS comparison with other UAV-based MOT trackers on the UAVDT test dataset. The horizontal axis is FPS, the vertical axis is MOTA, and the radius of the circle is IDF1.
    IDF1 comparison with other UAV-based MOT trackers on the UAVDT test dataset based on scene attributes. The IDF1 of FAANet is marked outside the circle.
    Fig. 7. IDF1 comparison with other UAV-based MOT trackers on the UAVDT test dataset based on scene attributes. The IDF1 of FAANet is marked outside the circle.
    Examples and comparison of tracking results between DeepSORT and FAANet on the UAVDT test dataset.
    Fig. 8. Examples and comparison of tracking results between DeepSORT and FAANet on the UAVDT test dataset.
    MOT MethodsYearFrameworkMOTA IDF1 MOTP MT ML FP FN IDS FM FPS
    SORT[1]2016Faster RCNN39.043.774.333.928.033,037172,62823505787Nan
    DeepSORT[2]2017Faster RCNN40.758.273.241.723.744,868155,2902061643215.01
    DeepAlign[20]2018Faster RCNN41.649.073.343.724.345,420152,224154637330.23
    SBMA[21]2019LSTM38.648.572.138.924.444,724160,950348911,796Nan
    IPGAT[8]2020LSTM + CGAN39.049.472.237.425.242,135163,837209110,057Nan
    M-CMSN-M[9]2020Faster RCNN43.162.673.545.322.745,900147,63839042590.64
    Quadruplet[22]2021Faster RCNN40.355.074.0NanNan30,065150,83710913057Nan
    FAANetNanRepVGG + JDE44.064.677.947.922.657,146133,496403720238.24
    Table 1. Results of a Quantitative Comparison among Classic MOT Methods and Recent UAV-Based Methods on the UAVDT Test Dataseta
    RepVGG-B0CASAFAAMOTA IDF1 FPS
    38.256.845.70
    39.759.243.52
    39.359.443.41
    40.460.241.35
    42.163.740.54
    44.064.638.24
    Table 2. Evaluation of the Critical Factors in FAANeta
    RepParams (106)FLOPs (109)MOTA IDF1 FPS
    15.962.344.064.630.32
    14.458.344.064.638.24
    Table 3. The Improvement of Re-parameterization Technique
    Zhenqi Liang, Jingshi Wang, Gang Xiao, Liu Zeng. FAANet: feature-aligned attention network for real-time multiple object tracking in UAV videos[J]. Chinese Optics Letters, 2022, 20(8): 081101
    Download Citation