Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 60 references

MambaNUT: Nighttime UAV Tracking via Mamba-based Adaptive Curriculum Learning

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A pure Mamba tracker with adaptive day-night curriculum learning achieves state-of-the-art results on three nighttime UAV tracking benchmarks at 75 FPS with 4.1 million parameters.

desk verdict Useful engineering contribution with a credible efficiency story, but the ACL sampling equation as printed does the opposite of what the text claims — the central mechanism needs a correction before the results can be fully trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00626 v3 pith:CLTNJUHZ submitted 2024-12-01 cs.CV

You Wu , Xiangyang Yang , Xucheng Wang , Hengzhou Ye , Dan Zeng , Shuiwang Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords nighttimeUAVtrackingMambastatespacemodeladaptivecurriculumlearningsingleobjectlow-lightefficientday-nightdomainimbalance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that nighttime UAV tracking does not need image enhancement or domain-adaptation discriminators: a single-stream tracker built on a pure Mamba backbone, trained with an adaptive curriculum that moves from daytime to nighttime data, can outperform specialized nighttime trackers while using far fewer parameters and FLOPs. On three nighttime benchmarks—NAT2024-1, NAT2021, and UAVDark135—the proposed MambaNUT sets new state-of-the-art precision and success scores on most metrics, running at roughly 75 FPS with 4.1 million parameters and 1.1 GMac FLOPs. The authors further show that the adaptive curriculum learning (ACL) strategy is responsible for a 3.7-point precision gain on NAT2024-1 over the same model without it. If true, this points to a more efficient end-to-end design for low-light aerial tracking that is deployable on embedded hardware.

What carries the argument

The central object is the bidirectional Vision Mamba encoder, a selective state-space model (S6) that runs forward and backward scans over tokenized template and search patches, replacing the self-attention of ViT-based trackers and keeping cost linear in sequence length. The second mechanism is Adaptive Curriculum Learning (ACL), composed of two schedulers: the sampling scheduler sets the sampling weight of each nighttime dataset to $1/(\theta e)$ at epoch $e$ with $\theta=150$, so the night share grows from small to balanced; the loss scheduler applies the ADW loss $L_{\text{ADW}} = -\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i} \omega_i^{(1-U_i)} \log(U_i) - U_i(1-U_i)$, with $\omega_i = \log(N_{\max}/N_j)+0.5$ based on dataset size and $U_i$ the instance IoU. These two schedulers work together to make the model first learn easy daytime features and then concentrate on hard nighttime cases.

What would settle it

Reproduce MambaNUT from Section IV-A using only the information given: form template-search pairs from BDD100K-Night, SHIFT-Night, and ExDark, train for 300 epochs with the ACL schedule, and evaluate on NAT2024-1. If the unstated pair-sampling step cannot be implemented unambiguously, or if removing ACL reduces precision by substantially less than the reported 3.7 points, the central claim that ACL plus Mamba delivers the state of the art would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

MambaNUT is a one-stream nighttime UAV tracker in which a bidirectional Vision Mamba encoder processes template and search patches jointly, and a lightweight center-based head regresses the target box; the backbone has linear complexity in sequence length, giving 1.1 GMac FLOPs and 4.1 million parameters. To handle the scarcity of nighttime tracking data, the authors add Adaptive Curriculum Learning: a sampling scheduler gradually increases the proportion of nighttime samples over 300 training epochs, and an Adaptive Data Weighted (ADW) loss up-weights small datasets and low-IoU instances. On NAT2024-1 the full model reaches 83.3% precision, 76.9% normalized precision, and 63.6% success, beating 16 prior trackers; on NAT2021 and UAVDark135 it leads in precision and normalized precision, with success rates within 0.2% of the best competitor, DCPT. The authors conclude that a pure Mamba backbone plus curriculum-based day-night training yields the best accuracy-efficiency trade-off among current nighttime UAV trackers.

Load-bearing premise

The training procedure mixes three static nighttime image datasets into template-search pairs, but the paper never explains how those pairs are sampled, so the entire reported gain depends on an unspecified data-construction step that must transfer to real UAV videos.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Nighttime UAV tracking can be done end-to-end without a separate low-light enhancer or a domain-adaptation discriminator, simplifying the deployment pipeline.
  • Mamba-based backbones with linear complexity are sufficient for accurate night tracking, lowering the compute bar: 1.1 GMac FLOPs, 4.1 million parameters, and over 75 FPS on a GPU, with more than 30 FPS on an onboard Jetson Orin NX.
  • The two ACL schedulers produce consistent gains over plain fine-tuning on NAT2024-1, improving precision, normalized precision, and success by more than three points each when both are used.
  • A single lightweight tracker can be competitive across three different nighttime benchmarks, indicating the approach generalizes beyond a single evaluation set.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The ACL sampling schedule is a general recipe for any imbalanced day/night or domain-shifted tracking setup; the idea of ramping the minority domain's sampling weight from low to balanced over training does not depend on Mamba and could be grafted onto ViT or CNN trackers.
  • Because the paper never specifies how template-search pairs are drawn from the static nighttime image datasets, an independent reproduction must first solve that step, and how much of the reported gain survives depends on that unstated choice.
  • The ADW loss's IoU-weighted modulation could plausibly transfer to other box-regression tasks such as daytime tracking or long-tailed object detection, though the paper only tests it in the night-UAV setting.
  • The one-stream Mamba design's long-sequence modeling may be a natural fit for long-term tracking where template drift accumulates over thousands of frames; NAT2024-1 includes 40 long-term sequences, but the paper does not separately analyze drift behavior.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. MambaNUT is a single-stream Vision Mamba tracker for nighttime UAV tracking. The paper proposes an Adaptive Curriculum Learning (ACL) scheme with two schedulers: a sampling scheduler that reweights daytime and nighttime training data over epochs, and an Adaptive Data Weighted (ADW) loss that weights samples by training-set size and per-instance IoU. The method is evaluated on NAT2024-1, NAT2021, and UAVDark135 against 16 baselines, with ablations, attribute-level analysis, and a real-world test on a Jetson Orin NX. The authors report state-of-the-art precision and success on these benchmarks with 1.1 GMac FLOPs, 4.1 million parameters, and roughly 72-75 FPS.

Significance. If the reported results hold, MambaNUT is a meaningful step toward efficient nighttime UAV tracking: it is the first Mamba-based tracker in this setting, it demonstrates a favorable accuracy-efficiency trade-off, and the ablation study suggests that the proposed curriculum contributes to the gains. The paper's strengths include broad comparisons against recent trackers, explicit efficiency reporting, attribute-level evaluation, a real-world embedded demonstration, and a clearly described one-stream architecture. However, the central ACL mechanism has a formula/prose contradiction, the ADW loss term appears too small in scale to explain the measured improvements, and the construction of nighttime tracking training pairs is unspecified; these issues must be resolved before the claims are reproducible.

major comments (3)
  1. [§III-C, Eq. (3)] The sampling scheduler as printed is not the easy-to-hard curriculum described in the text. Eq. (3) gives nighttime datasets a weight of 1/(θ e), with θ = 150 and e the current epoch; since e runs from 1 to 300, the nighttime weight decreases monotonically from 0.0067 to 0.000022 relative to the daytime weight of 1. This would progressively starve the model of nighttime data, which is the opposite of the stated schedule. The surrounding prose says the weights are obtained 'dividing by a constant and multiplying by the training epochs,' which would instead give e/θ and an increasing nighttime weight. If the implementation uses e/θ, the equation must be corrected; if it uses the printed formula, the Table II gains attributed to the sampling scheduler cannot be explained by the described curriculum. Please provide the exact implemented schedule and reconcile Eq. (3) with the text.
  2. [§IV-A] The training procedure is not reproducible because the paper never specifies how template-search pairs are constructed from BDD100K-Night, SHIFT-Night, and ExDark. These datasets are not standard tracking datasets: ExDark is a still-image dataset, and while BDD100K and SHIFT contain video, the paper does not state whether nighttime ground-truth boxes are used, how positive pairs are sampled (e.g., same-video temporal proximity versus random static pairs), what frame intervals are allowed, or what augmentation is applied. This is load-bearing because the method is a tracker and the ACL is claimed to improve nighttime tracking; if the pairs are formed from independent still images, the model may not learn temporal correspondence, and the reported transfer to UAV video benchmarks would be unsurprising only if the pairing protocol is meaningful. Please describe the exact pair-sampling protocol, including source of target boxes and any filtering.
  3. [§IV-A, Eq. (8)] The claimed contribution of the ADW loss scheduler is difficult to reconcile with the stated weight γ = 0.00001. For typical IoU values U_i in [0,1], the terms in Eq. (4) are of order 1-10 (or larger for very low IoU), so γ L_ADW contributes at most about 10^-4 to 10^-3 to the total loss when L_cls, λ_iou L_iou, and λ_L1 L_L1 are of order 1-10. Such a negligible term is unlikely to account for the 1.5-3.0 point improvements attributed to the loss scheduler in Tables II and III. Please report the actual scaling used in the implementation, provide gradient norms or loss-scale ablations, or justify why γ = 0.00001 is not effectively a no-op.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§IV-C and Table I] The efficiency numbers are inconsistent: §IV-C says DCPT requires 42 GMacs and 99 million parameters, but Table I reports 29.4 GMacs and 92.9 million; the abstract and Fig. 1 say 75 FPS, §IV-C says 'over 75 fps,' and Table I lists 72 FPS. Please reconcile these values.
  2. [Eq. (4)] The notation in Eq. (4) is ambiguous: the expression appears as ω(1-Ui)i, and it should be written as ω_i^{(1-U_i)} to distinguish the exponent from the sample index.
  3. [§III-A, §III-B, §III-C] There are several typos that should be corrected: 'whih' in §III-A, 'Visison' in §III-B, 'a Adaptive' in §II, and 'logic ratio' in §III-C (likely 'log ratio').
  4. [§IV-E and Fig. 5] Fig. 5 uses the symbol 'MambaNUT*' without defining it in the caption; the text in §IV-D defines it, but the figure should be self-contained.
  5. [§IV-A] The sentence 'the search region and template sizes set to 256 × 256 and 128 × 128' should be rephrased to state explicitly that the search image is 256 × 256 and the template is 128 × 128, matching the notation in §III-B.
  6. [General] The ablations are reported without variance across runs; given the stochastic nature of deep tracking training, reporting mean and standard deviation over multiple seeds would make the improvements more convincing.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: MambaNUT's gains are validated on held-out benchmarks, and its curriculum schedules depend only on epoch number and training-set statistics, not on test metrics.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are supported by evaluations on the held-out NAT2021, NAT2024-1, and UAVDark135 benchmarks, while the ACL sampling and loss schedulers are functions of the current epoch e, the constant theta, and the training-dataset sizes Nmax and Nj (Eqs. 3 and 4); none of these quantities is derived from or fitted to the test-set metrics. The baseline+SS+LS ablation in Table II is an internal comparison on NAT2024-1, and the gains are presented as empirical evidence rather than as an analytically forced consequence of the equations. The paper does cite prior work by overlapping authors (e.g., AVTrack-DeiT [12] and Aba-ViTrack [11]), but only as comparison methods, not as load-bearing justification for MambaNUT's design or for any uniqueness claim. The apparent inconsistency in Eq. (3), where the typewritten nighttime weight 1/(theta*e) decreases with epoch although the text describes a day-to-night curriculum, is a reproducibility or correctness concern about whether the published formula matches the implementation; it is not a circularity, because neither the formula nor the text makes the result true by definition. Overall, no step in the derivation chain reduces to its own inputs or to a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The central claim rests on a set of hand-set hyperparameters and on the domain assumption that non-tracking nighttime image datasets can be used to train a tracker. The standard mathematics of Mamba is assumed.

free parameters (4)
  • theta = 150
    Scaling constant in the sampling scheduler (Eq. 3), set to half the training epochs.
  • gamma = 0.00001
    Weight for the ADW loss term in the total loss (Eq. 8).
  • lambda_iou = 2
    Weight for the GIoU loss (Eq. 8).
  • lambda_L1 = 5
    Weight for the L1 loss (Eq. 8).
assumptions (3)
  • standard math State space model discretization via zero-order hold (ZOH).
    Used in Eq. 2 to define the Mamba backbone.
  • domain assumption The nighttime image datasets (BDD100K-Night, SHIFT-Night, ExDark) can be repurposed as tracking training data.
    The method's training depends on converting these non-tracking datasets into template-search pairs, a procedure not described in Section IV-A.
  • domain assumption A curriculum from easier daytime data to harder nighttime data improves generalization.
    This is the core premise of the ACL strategy, validated only by the ablation on NAT2024-1.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of MambaNUT: Nighttime UAV Tracking via Mamba-based Adaptive Curriculum Learning." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CLTNJUHZ

@misc{pith2026241200626,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: MambaNUT: Nighttime UAV Tracking via Mamba-based Adaptive Curriculum Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CLTNJUHZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00626}
}
read the original abstract

Harnessing low-light enhancement and domain adaptation, nighttime UAV tracking has made substantial strides. However, over-reliance on image enhancement, limited high-quality nighttime data, and a lack of integration between daytime and nighttime trackers hinder the development of an end-to-end trainable framework. Additionally, current ViT-based trackers demand heavy computational resources due to their reliance on the self-attention mechanism. In this paper, we propose a novel pure Mamba-based tracking framework (MambaNUT) that employs a state space model with linear complexity as its backbone, incorporating a single-stream architecture that integrates feature learning and template-search coupling within Vision Mamba. We introduce an adaptive curriculum learning (ACL) approach that dynamically adjusts sampling strategies and loss weights, thereby improving the model's ability of generalization. Our ACL is composed of two levels of curriculum schedulers: (1) sampling scheduler that transforms the data distribution from imbalanced to balanced, as well as from easier (daytime) to harder (nighttime) samples; (2) loss scheduler that dynamically assigns weights based on the size of the training set and IoU of individual instances. Exhaustive experiments on multiple nighttime UAV tracking benchmarks demonstrate that the proposed MambaNUT achieves state-of-the-art performance while requiring lower computational costs. The code will be available at https://github.com/wuyou3474/MambaNUT.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.00626 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Compared to SOTA trackers on NAT2024-1 [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Training data distribution varies sharply between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of the proposed MambaNUT framework. It includes a Vision Mamba backbone and a tracking head, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative evaluation on two video sequences from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Illumination-oriented evaluation comparison with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Visualization of feature maps generated by Mam [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Uav assisted usv visual navigation for marine mass casualty incident response,

    X. Xiao, J. Dufek, T. Woodbury, and R. Murphy, “Uav assisted usv visual navigation for marine mass casualty incident response,” inIROS, 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Video processing techniques for traffic flow monitoring: A survey,

    B. Tian, Q. Yao, Y . Gu, K. Wang, and Y . Li, “Video processing techniques for traffic flow monitoring: A survey,” in ITSC, 2011

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    On the visual-based safe landing of uavs in populated areas: a crucial aspect for urban deployment,

    J. Gonz ´alez-Trejo, D. Mercado-Ravell, I. Becerra, and R. Murrieta- Cid, “On the visual-based safe landing of uavs in populated areas: a crucial aspect for urban deployment,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 7901–7908, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Imagenet classifica- tion with deep convolutional neural networks,

    A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever, and G. E. Hinton, “Imagenet classifica- tion with deep convolutional neural networks,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 25, 2012

    2012

  5. [5]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition,

    K. He, X. Zhang, and et al, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” in CVPR, 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,

    A. Dosovitskiy, “An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929 , 2020

    arXiv 2010

  7. [7]

    Lasot: A high-quality benchmark for large- scale single object tracking,

    H. Fan, L. Lin, and et al, “Lasot: A high-quality benchmark for large- scale single object tracking,” in CVPR, 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Got-10k: A large high-diversity benchmark for generic object tracking in the wild,

    L. Huang, X. Zhao, and K. Huang, “Got-10k: A large high-diversity benchmark for generic object tracking in the wild,” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 1562– 1577, 2019

    work page 2019

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Trackingnet: A large-scale dataset and benchmark for object tracking in the wild,

    M. Muller, A. Bibi, and et al, “Trackingnet: A large-scale dataset and benchmark for object tracking in the wild,” in ECCV, 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    Tctrack: Temporal contexts for aerial tracking,

    Z. Cao, Z. Huang, and et al, “Tctrack: Temporal contexts for aerial tracking,” in CVPR, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Adaptive and background-aware vision transformer for real-time uav tracking,

    S. Li, Y . Yang, and et al, “Adaptive and background-aware vision transformer for real-time uav tracking,” in ICCV, 2023

    2023

  4. [12]

    Learning adaptive and view-invariant vision transformer for real-time uav tracking,

    Y . Li, M. Liu, Y . Wu, X. Wang, X. Yang, and S. Li, “Learning adaptive and view-invariant vision transformer for real-time uav tracking,” in Forty-first International Conference on Machine Learning , 2024

    2024

  5. [13]

    Unsupervised domain adaptation for nighttime aerial tracking,

    J. Ye, C. Fu, and et al, “Unsupervised domain adaptation for nighttime aerial tracking,” in CVPR, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Prompt- driven temporal domain adaptation for nighttime uav tracking,

    C. Fu, Y . Wang, L. Yao, G. Zheng, H. Zuo, and J. Pan, “Prompt- driven temporal domain adaptation for nighttime uav tracking,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.18533, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Darklighter: Light up the darkness for uav tracking,

    J. Ye, C. Fu, and et al, “Darklighter: Light up the darkness for uav tracking,” in IROS, 2021

    2021

  8. [16]

    Tracker meets night: A transformer enhancer for uav tracking,

    J. Ye, C. Fu, Z. Cao, S. An, G. Zheng, and B. Li, “Tracker meets night: A transformer enhancer for uav tracking,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 3866–3873, 2022

    2022

  9. [17]

    Enhancing night- time uav tracking with light distribution suppression,

    L. Yao, C. Fu, Y . Wang, H. Zuo, and K. Lu, “Enhancing night- time uav tracking with light distribution suppression,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.16631, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Sam-da: Uav tracks anything at night with sam-powered domain adaptation,

    C. Fu, L. Yao, and et al, “Sam-da: Uav tracks anything at night with sam-powered domain adaptation,” in ICARM, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Dcpt: Darkness clue-prompted tracking in nighttime uavs,

    J. Zhu, H. Tang, and et al, “Dcpt: Darkness clue-prompted tracking in nighttime uavs,” in ICRA, 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces,

    A. Gu and T. Dao, “Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00752 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Videomamba: State space model for efficient video understanding,

    K. Li, X. Li, Y . Wang, Y . He, Y . Wang, L. Wang, and Y . Qiao, “Videomamba: State space model for efficient video understanding,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.06977 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Vm-unet: Vision mamba unet for medical image segmentation,

    J. Ruan and S. Xiang, “Vm-unet: Vision mamba unet for medical image segmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.02491 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Cost-sensitive learning of deep feature representations from imbal- anced data,

    S. H. Khan, M. Hayat, M. Bennamoun, F. A. Sohel, and R. Togneri, “Cost-sensitive learning of deep feature representations from imbal- anced data,” IEEE transactions on neural networks and learning systems, vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 3573–3587, 2017

    2017

  16. [24]

    Shift: a synthetic driving dataset for continuous multi-task domain adaptation,

    T. Sun, M. Segu, and et al, “Shift: a synthetic driving dataset for continuous multi-task domain adaptation,” in CVPR, 2022

    2022

  17. [25]

    Getting to know low-light images with the exclusively dark dataset,

    Y . P. Loh and C. S. Chan, “Getting to know low-light images with the exclusively dark dataset,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding, vol. 178, pp. 30–42, 2019

    2019

  18. [26]

    Bdd100k: A diverse driving dataset for heterogeneous multitask learning,

    F. Yu, H. Chen, and et al, “Bdd100k: A diverse driving dataset for heterogeneous multitask learning,” in CVPR, 2020

    2020

  19. [27]

    Learning from imbalanced data,

    H. He and E. A. Garcia, “Learning from imbalanced data,” IEEE Transactions on knowledge and data engineering , vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1263–1284, 2009

    2009

  20. [28]

    Classification with rejection based on cost-sensitive classification,

    N. Charoenphakdee, Z. Cui, and et al, “Classification with rejection based on cost-sensitive classification,” in ICML, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Curriculum learning,

    Y . Bengio, J. Louradour, R. Collobert, and J. Weston, “Curriculum learning,” in ICML, 2009

    2009

  22. [30]

    Efficiently modeling long sequences with structured state spaces,

    A. Gu, K. Goel, and C. R ´e, “Efficiently modeling long sequences with structured state spaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.00396 , 2021

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Vision mamba: Efficient visual representation learning with bidirectional state space model,

    L. Zhu, B. Liao, Q. Zhang, X. Wang, W. Liu, and X. Wang, “Vision mamba: Efficient visual representation learning with bidirectional state space model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.09417 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Vmamba: Visual state space model,

    Y . Liu, Y . Tian, Y . Zhao, H. Yu, L. Xie, Y . Wang, Q. Ye, and Y . Liu, “Vmamba: Visual state space model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.10166, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Swin-umamba: Mamba-based unet with imagenet-based pretraining,

    J. Liu, H. Yang, and et al, “Swin-umamba: Mamba-based unet with imagenet-based pretraining,” in MICCAI, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Mambatrack: a simple baseline for multiple object tracking with state space model,

    C. Xiao, Q. Cao, Z. Luo, and L. Lan, “Mambatrack: a simple baseline for multiple object tracking with state space model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.09178, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Teaching classification boundaries to humans,

    S. Basu and J. Christensen, “Teaching classification boundaries to humans,” in AAAI, 2013

    2013

  28. [36]

    On the power of curriculum learning in training deep networks,

    G. Hacohen and D. Weinshall, “On the power of curriculum learning in training deep networks,” in ICML, 2019

    2019

  29. [37]

    How do humans teach: On curriculum learning and teaching dimension,

    F. Khan, B. Mutlu, and J. Zhu, “How do humans teach: On curriculum learning and teaching dimension,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 24, 2011

    2011

  30. [38]

    Self-paced learning for latent variable models,

    M. Kumar, B. Packer, and D. Koller, “Self-paced learning for latent variable models,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 23, 2010

    2010

  31. [39]

    Dynamic curriculum learning for imbalanced data classification,

    Y . Wang, W. Gan, and et al, “Dynamic curriculum learning for imbalanced data classification,” in ICCV, 2019

    2019

  32. [40]

    Semi-supervised action recognition from temporal augmentation using curriculum learning,

    A. Tong, C. Tang, and W. Wang, “Semi-supervised action recognition from temporal augmentation using curriculum learning,” IEEE Trans- actions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology , vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 1305–1319, 2022

    2022

  33. [41]

    Bridging saliency detection to weakly supervised object detection based on self-paced curriculum learning,

    D. Zhang, D. Meng, L. Zhao, and J. Han, “Bridging saliency detection to weakly supervised object detection based on self-paced curriculum learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.01290 , 2017

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Curriculum self- paced learning for cross-domain object detection,

    P. Soviany, R. T. Ionescu, P. Rota, and N. Sebe, “Curriculum self- paced learning for cross-domain object detection,” Computer Vision and Image Understanding , vol. 204, p. 103166, 2021

    2021

  35. [43]

    A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems,

    R. E. Kalman, “A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems,” 1960

    1960

  36. [44]

    Dynamically weighted bal- anced loss: class imbalanced learning and confidence calibration of deep neural networks,

    K. R. M. Fernando and C. P. Tsokos, “Dynamically weighted bal- anced loss: class imbalanced learning and confidence calibration of deep neural networks,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 2940–2951, 2021

    2021

  37. [45]

    All-day object tracking for unmanned aerial vehicle,

    B. Li, C. Fu, F. Ding, J. Ye, and F. Lin, “All-day object tracking for unmanned aerial vehicle,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing , vol. 22, no. 8, pp. 4515–4529, 2022

    2022

  38. [46]

    Sgdvit: Saliency-guided dynamic vision transformer for uav tracking,

    L. Yao, C. Fu, and et al, “Sgdvit: Saliency-guided dynamic vision transformer for uav tracking,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04378, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Exploring lightweight hierarchical vision transformers for efficient visual tracking,

    B. Kang, X. Chen, and et al, “Exploring lightweight hierarchical vision transformers for efficient visual tracking,” in ICCV, 2023

    2023

  40. [48]

    Representation learning for visual object tracking by masked appearance transfer,

    H. Zhao, D. Wang, and H. Lu, “Representation learning for visual object tracking by masked appearance transfer,” in CVPR, 2023

    2023

  41. [49]

    Towards real- world visual tracking with temporal contexts,

    Z. Cao, Z. Huang, L. Pan, S. Zhang, Z. Liu, and C. Fu, “Towards real- world visual tracking with temporal contexts,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 2023

    2023

  42. [50]

    Hift: Hierarchical feature transformer for aerial tracking,

    Z. Cao, C. Fu, and et al, “Hift: Hierarchical feature transformer for aerial tracking,” in ICCV, 2021

    2021

  43. [51]

    Siamapn++: Siamese attentional aggregation network for real-time uav tracking,

    Z. Cao, C. Fu, J. Ye, B. Li, and Y . Li, “Siamapn++: Siamese attentional aggregation network for real-time uav tracking,” in IROS, 2021

    2021

  44. [52]

    Siamcar: Siamese fully convolutional classification and regression for visual tracking,

    D. Guo, J. Wang, and et al, “Siamcar: Siamese fully convolutional classification and regression for visual tracking,” in CVPR, 2020

    2020

  45. [53]

    Ocean: Object-aware anchor-free tracking,

    Z. Zhang, H. Peng, and et al, “Ocean: Object-aware anchor-free tracking,” in European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2020

    2020

  46. [54]

    Joint feature learning and relation modeling for tracking: A one-stream framework,

    B. Ye, H. Chang, B. Ma, and et al, “Joint feature learning and relation modeling for tracking: A one-stream framework,” in ECCV, 2022

    2022

  47. [55]

    Cornernet: Detecting objects as paired key- points,

    H. Law and J. Deng, “Cornernet: Detecting objects as paired key- points,” in ECCV, 2018

    2018

  48. [56]

    Generalized intersection over union: A metric and a loss for bounding box regression,

    H. Rezatofighi, N. Tsoi, and et al, “Generalized intersection over union: A metric and a loss for bounding box regression,” in Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2019, pp. 658–666

    2019

  49. [57]

    Mamba-r: Vision mamba also needs registers,

    F. Wang, J. Wang, S. Ren, G. Wei, J. Mei, W. Shao, Y . Zhou, A. Yuille, and C. Xie, “Mamba-r: Vision mamba also needs registers,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14858, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Microsoft coco: Common objects in context,

    T.-Y . Lin, M. Maire, S. Belongie, J. Hays, P. Perona, D. Ramanan, P. Doll ´ar, and C. L. Zitnick, “Microsoft coco: Common objects in context,” in European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2014

    2014

  51. [59]

    Focal loss for dense object detection,

    T. Lin, “Focal loss for dense object detection,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.02002, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Generalised dice overlap as a deep learning loss function for highly unbalanced segmentations,

    C. H. Sudre, W. Li, , and et al, “Generalised dice overlap as a deep learning loss function for highly unbalanced segmentations,” in DLMIA, 2017

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.