• Laser & Optoelectronics Progress
  • Vol. 59, Issue 12, 1210013 (2022)
Keying Xu, Ping Shu, and Hua Bao*
Author Affiliations
  • School of Electrical Engineering and Automation, Anhui University, Hefei 230601, Anhui , China
  • show less
    DOI: 10.3788/LOP202259.1210013 Cite this Article Set citation alerts
    Keying Xu, Ping Shu, Hua Bao. Visual Tracking Combining Attention and Feature Fusion Network Modulation[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(12): 1210013 Copy Citation Text show less
    Framework of proposed algorithm
    Fig. 1. Framework of proposed algorithm
    Architecture of the SK attention network
    Fig. 2. Architecture of the SK attention network
    Architecture of the MSI module
    Fig. 3. Architecture of the MSI module
    Visualization results of originalimage and features from corresponding layer.(a) Original image centered on the target; (b) low level features; (c) high level features; (d) fused version generated by MFB
    Fig. 4. Visualization results of originalimage and features from corresponding layer.(a) Original image centered on the target; (b) low level features; (c) high level features; (d) fused version generated by MFB
    Architecture of the multi-scale channel attention network
    Fig. 5. Architecture of the multi-scale channel attention network
    Comparison of success rate and precision on OTB100 dataset. (a) Success rate; (b) precision
    Fig. 6. Comparison of success rate and precision on OTB100 dataset. (a) Success rate; (b) precision
    EAO performance on VOT2018 dataset
    Fig. 7. EAO performance on VOT2018 dataset
    EAO under different visual attributes on VOT2018
    Fig. 8. EAO under different visual attributes on VOT2018
    Comparison of success rate and accuracy on LaSOT dataset.(a) Success rate; (b) normalized precision
    Fig. 9. Comparison of success rate and accuracy on LaSOT dataset.(a) Success rate; (b) normalized precision
    Comparison of speed and performance of different algorithms on LaSOT dataset
    Fig. 10. Comparison of speed and performance of different algorithms on LaSOT dataset
    Tracking results of five algorithms
    Fig. 11. Tracking results of five algorithms
    ParameterDLSTSASiamRCPTDRTRCOMFTLADCFATOMOurs
    EAO0.3250.3370.3390.3560.3760.3850.3890.4010.426
    Acc.0.5430.5660.5070.5190.5070.5050.5030.5900.597
    Rob.0.2240.2580.2390.2010.1550.1400.1590.2040.183
    Table 1. Comparison of experimental results on the VOT2018 dataset
    ParameterECOSiamFCSPMMDNetSiamMaskATOMD3SOurs
    AUC /%55.457.171.260.672.570.372.872.8
    Prec. /%49.253.366.156.566.464.866.467.2
    Prec.N /%61.866.644.870.577.877.176.878.9
    Table 2. Comparison of experimental results on the TrackingNet dataset
    ParameterECOSiamFCSPMMDNetSiamMaskATOMD3SOurs
    AO /%31.534.851.329.951.455.659.758.2
    SR0.75 /%11.19.835.99.936.640.246.245.4
    SR0.5 /%30.935.359.330.358.763.567.666.7
    Table 3. Comparison of experimental results on the GOT10k dataset
    No.SKMSIPMB

    VOT2018

    EAO

    GOT10k

    AO

    SFBMFB-MCAMMFB
    0.4010.556
    0.4120.564
    0.4160.571
    0.4130569
    0.4210.575
    0.4260.582
    Table 4. Tracking results of the proposed algorithm after adding various components
    Keying Xu, Ping Shu, Hua Bao. Visual Tracking Combining Attention and Feature Fusion Network Modulation[J]. Laser & Optoelectronics Progress, 2022, 59(12): 1210013
    Download Citation