n
XXX
′′′
,...,
21
are regenerated. The regenerated
particles all come from the original particle set
n
XXX ,...,
21
, in which the large particles
generated by the weights generate more new
particles, and the particles having the smaller
weights correspond to fewer new particles.
5) State transfer
At the next moment, the particles are updated,
that is,
i
X
′
becomes
i
X
′′
. Since the probability that
the state transition from
i
X
′
to
i
X
′′
can be obtained
from the state matrix is
)(
1−kk
xxp
, the probability
of changing from
i
X
′
to
i
X
′′
is equal to
)(
1−kk
xxp
.
6) Repeat 2 to 5.
In the experiment, the number of particles was
selected as 200. The particle filter algorithm of this
paper also adopts the method of manually selecting
the tracking target. First, the initial frame is
displayed, and a rectangle, that is, the ship feature
search window containing the ship's target is
selected by using the selection box, and the ship's
edge is cut as far as possible, and right-cut. Use the
[temp,rect]=imcrop(I) format to cut, the image
matrix of the ship model is saved in the temp
variable, and then a histogram is calculated for the
variable; the initial position coordinates of the ship
are stored in the rect variable for calculation The
center coordinates of the ship.
3.3 Error Analysis
In this paper, the distance between the tracking
center point and the actual movement center point is
calculated to calculate the error of comparing the
two algorithms. The center point of the actual
movement uses the manual selection method, writes
a program, selects 9 frames, and determines the
coordinates of the center point; then uses a
polynomial fitting method to perform 6 fittings to fit
the actual motion trajectory; then it calculates the
two tracks separately. The error between the curve
and the trajectory is measured by the error and
variance of the average per frame. The error
calculation result shows the MATLAB running
screenshot, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1 Comparison of tracking errors.
Average per frame error (pixels) Average gap between two
algorithms per frame (pixels)
Particle filter method 3.7212 5.7782
Mean shift method 2.3213
From the above tracking results, it can be seen
that both algorithms have jitter in the tracking
process, but the overall trend is correct, and the
mean error using the mean shift method is smaller
than the particle filter method, and the difference
between the two methods does not exceed 6 pixels.
3.4 Real-time Analysis
Use the tic and toc commands to output the total
running time of the program. The results are shown
in Table 2.
Table 2 Runtime Comparison.
Tracking algorithm Running time (s)
Particle filter algorithm 48.151951
Mean shift algorithm 115.003216
It can be seen that the operation time of the
particle filter algorithm is far less than the mean shift
algorithm, and the real-time performance is better.
This aspect is the reason for the algorithm, and on
the other hand, it is the reason for the design of the
program itself.
3.5 Effect of Particle Number on Particle
Filtering Tracking
Set the number of particles to 100, 200, 500, 1000,
and 2000, and observe the effect on the program.