Abstract

The finite-set statistics (FISST) foundational approach to multitarget tracking and information fusion was introduced in the mid-1990s and extended in 2001. FISST was devised to be as “engineering-friendly” as possible by avoiding avoidable mathematical abstraction and complexity—and, especially, by avoiding measure theory and measure-theoretic point process (p.p.) theory. Recently, however, an allegedly more general theoretical foundation for multitarget tracking has been proposed. In it, the constituent components of FISST have been systematically replaced by mathematically more complicated concepts—and, especially, by the very measure theory and measure-theoretic p.p.’s that FISST eschews. It is shown that this proposed alternative is actually a mathematical paraphrase of part of FISST that does not correctly address the technical idiosyncrasies of the multitarget tracking application.

Highlights

  • The finite-set statistics (FISST) foundational approach to multitarget tracking and information fusion—stochastic geometry, random finite sets (RFS’s), belief-mass functions, and set derivatives and integrals—was introduced in the mid-1990s [1]

  • This is because FISST (a) has an integro-differential calculus of possibly nonadditive set functions and their density functions (Section 3.1); and (b) it Bayes-optimally addresses multitarget-multisource information fusion using “hard + soft” data in a unified manner [2] (Chapters 3–7); [3] (Chapter 22)

  • The latter is attributable to the fact that FISST is based on stochastic geometry, which in turn is based on the theory of random closed subsets (RCS’s) [19], which in turn is the basis of FISST’s unification of

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The finite-set statistics (FISST) foundational approach to multitarget tracking and information fusion—stochastic geometry, random finite sets (RFS’s), belief-mass functions, and set derivatives and integrals—was introduced in the mid-1990s [1]. Still fewer have studied point process (p.p.) theory (which typically requires proficiency in measure theory), and few are proficient For this reason, FISST does not employ measure theory or measure-theoretic p.p.’s, because simpler and more practical concepts, such as multitarget density functions, RFS’s, and Volterra functional derivatives, suffice. [4,11], is intended to answer this question It will address the alternative multitarget statistical theory described in Refs. (Section 2.1); RFS’s are simpler than simple p.p.’s (Section 2.2); non-RFS p.p.’s are inappropriate for multitarget tracking (Section 2.3); vectors are poor multitarget state representations (Section 2.4); simple p.p.’s produce a flawed mathematical paraphrase of RFS’s (Section 2.5); and FISST is more general than MPMT (Section 2.6)

RFS’s Are Not an “Alternative Construction”
Vectors Are Poor Multitarget State Representations
FISST is More General than MPMT
FISST Densities Replaced by “Measures”
Basic Concepts of Finite-Set Statistics
The FISST Multitarget Density of the Regional Variance
Measures Are Inappropriate for Practical Multitarget Tracking
Set Integrals Replaced by Measure-Theoretic Integrals
Extending Lesbegue Measure to Multitarget States
Measure-Theoretic Integrals and Multitarget State Estimation
Functional Derivatives Replaced by “Chain Differentials”
Probability Generating Functionals
Differentiation Theory
FISST Product Rule Replaced by “Leibniz’ Rule”
RFS Motion Models Replaced by MPMT Motion Models
The “Standard” FISST Multitarget Motion Model
The FISST and MPMT Motion Models Are Identical
Mathematical Derivations
Derivation of the Density Function of the Regional Variance
The Set Integral of the Reegional-Variance Density Is the Regional Variance
Conclusions
Methods
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call