Measurement-to-Track Association and Finite-Set Statistics

Ronald Mahler
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1701.07078
2017-01-05
Methodology
Abstract:Multi-hypothesis trackers (MHT's), which are based on the measurement-to-track association (MTA) concept, have long been asserted to be "Bayes-optimal." Recently, rather bolder claims have come to the fore: "The right model of the multitarget state is that used in the multi-hypothesis tracker (MHT) paradigm, not the RSF [random finite set] paradigm." Or, the RFS approach is essentially a mathematically obfuscated reinvention of MHT. In this paper it is shown that: (a) although MTA's can be given a Bayesian formulation, this formulation is not fully consistent with Bayesian statistics; (b) phenomenologically, an MTA is a heuristic extrapolation of an intuitive special case to general multitarget scenarios; (c) MTA's are, therefore, not physically real entities and thus cannot (as with MHT's) be employed as state representations of a multitarget system; (d) MHT's are, consequently, heuristic approximations of the actual Bayes-optimal approach, the multitarget Bayes filter; (d)the theoretically correct measurement modeling approach is the RSF multitarget likelihood function L_Z(X) = f(Z|X); (f) although MTA's do occur in f(Z|X), they are the consequence of a mere change of notation during the RFS derivation of f(Z|X); and (g) the generalized labeled multi-Bernoulli (GLMB) filter of Vo and Vo is currently the only provably Bayes-optimal and computationally tractable approach for true multitarget tracking using MTA's.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?