Papers › An Informative Tracking Benchmark
An Informative Tracking Benchmark
Xin Li, Qiao Liu, Wenjie Pei, Qiuhong Shen, YaoWei Wang, Huchuan Lu, Ming-Hsuan Yang
Along with the rapid progress of visual tracking, existing benchmarks become less informative due to redundancy of samples and weak discrimination between current trackers, making evaluations on all datasets extremely time-consuming. Thus, a small and informative benchmark, which covers all typical challenging scenarios to facilitate assessing the tracker performance, is of great interest. In this work, we develop a principled way to construct a small and informative tracking benchmark (ITB) with 7% out of 1.2 M frames of existing and newly collected datasets, which enables efficient evaluation while ensuring effectiveness. Specifically, we first design a quality assessment mechanism to select the most informative sequences from existing benchmarks taking into account 1) challenging level, 2) discriminative strength, 3) and density of appearance variations. Furthermore, we collect additional sequences to ensure the diversity and balance of tracking scenarios, leading to a total of 20 sequences for each scenario. By analyzing the results of 15 state-of-the-art trackers re-trained on the same data, we determine the effective methods for robust tracking under each scenario and demonstrate new challenges for future research direction in this field.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Datasets
Introduced by this paper, per the archive.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections