| 查看: 3999 | 回复: 18 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
smallbug2000木虫 (著名写手)
|
[求助]
哥的论文大修，哥很郁闷，哥不想改了
|
||
|
投了一篇论文到计算机视觉相关的杂志，最近返回结果，三个审稿人，其中两个审稿人意见较少。另一个觉得算法的创新性不够，给了大修，悲剧的是这篇论文之前投到CVPR去，也是这个审稿人审的（CVPR据了我），因为审稿意见基本一样，故可以断定是同一审稿人。最终编辑给了大修，但是我很绝望，因为给大修的审稿人从一开始就不认可我的算法，我想既然我认真修改了，可能还是会被他据。将编辑及大修审稿人意见附后，在此向各位大牛咨询两件事：1）该论文是否值得大修，修后被据的概率多大？2）如果大修，如果对付审稿人这么尖锐的问题。在些感谢，对于好的建议发放金币。 Dear**, Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision. The reviewers' comments can be found at the end of this email or can be accessed by following the provided link. Reviewers' comments: The paper was reviewed by three experts on the topic. The reviewers agree that the paper discusses an important problem worth pursuing. They, however, also unanimously point out short comings of the paper, most important of which is the lack of thorough theoretical and experimental validation of the claims as well as references to prior work. The paper needs major revision to be considered for publication. If the authors decide to submit a major revision, please make sure to address the points raised by the reviewers. Reviewer #2: : This paper deals with the problem of visual tracking with irregular object motion. The particle set shift approach based on analytic optimization is proposed to deal with the incorrect state dynamic model. Particles are first sampled by the state dynamic model and they are moved to higher likelihood regions by newton optimization by maximizing likelihoods. The efficacy of the proposed approach is demonstrated via experiments with real sequences. - Positive points: Practically effective approach - Negative points: Not novel approach, rather heuristic, not convincing experimental results : The main problem of this paper is the proposed approach is not novel. The proposed approach is quite similar to [18] except the fact that the proposed approach used newton optimization instead of mean shift. : The proposed approach is rather heuristic. In the algorithm, particle weights are only proportional to likelihood, and this holds true for SIR particle filter where particles are sampled from state dynamic model. However, since particles are moved to higher likelihoods artificially, the weights determined from likelihoods will no longer correctly represent the true posterior. The proposed approach is rather similar to the particle swarm optimization-based tracking, e.g., "" by X. ** et al in CVPR 2008. Another problem of the proposed approach is that it might result in worse tracking results when there are appearance changes caused by various issues such as pose and lighting changes. : Since the proposed work is based on particle filter, the optimal importance functions used for visual tracking are also relevant. If we can use the optimal importance function, the irregular motion can be handled at least partially. Thus the following papers should be cited and commented as related work: - : The supplementary video result is too limited. Only a result for a single short sequence is not sufficient to support the validity of the proposed approach. Why is there no rotational motion in the results? The paper says that the state is translation, scale, and rotation, but there is no rotational motion in the results in the paper and video. : There must be cases that all particles are outside the basin of convergence. Since the particle are shifted by local optimization, particles will diverge from the optimal positions and tracking will fail. In the proposed approach, there is no consideration of this possibility. : The optimization will increase the computational complexity considerably. It is necessary to compare the other algorithms under the same computational time, e.g., proposed framework with 100 particles and standard particle filter with 1000 particles. My current recommendation is major revision. If the authors want to make the paper accepted in spite of the limited novelty and contribution, I think the followings should be addressed in the revision: - Additional experiments with object appearance changes like illumination - Addition of a mechanism to deal with the local optima problems with additional experiments with related videos - Comparison under the same computational complexity for different tracking algorithms [ Last edited by smallbug2000 on 2012-9-6 at 09:52 ] |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 文章写作 |
» 猜你喜欢
今天务委会开完了，明天出结果吗
已经有21人回复
-
2026年8月25日国自然放榜前突然收到列入评审专家邮件，有关系吗？
已经有14人回复
-
在坚冰还盖着北海的时候，我看到了怒放的梅花。
已经有9人回复
-
明天应该可查了！？
已经有6人回复
-
有没有大神帮我看看基金代码
已经有10人回复
-
放榜前的不淡定
已经有19人回复
-
某些机构，以效率低为荣，以效率低作为存在感
已经有10人回复
-
2026国自然函评费到账
已经有23人回复
-
今日不放榜？网传国自然预计 8 月 27 日可查结果
已经有22人回复
-
什么时候开奖？
已经有13人回复
» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
- 哥一直修改论文到现在
已经有29人回复
- 修改意见是小修还是大修？已经又返回去外审了，不懂！求教！
已经有9人回复
- 还是reject and resubmitted
已经有8人回复
- SCI论文大修意见中有一条修改意见不知道理解的对不对，请高手帮看看
已经有11人回复
- 文章从major revision到 reject and resubmitted怎么回事？
已经有16人回复
- 不想按评审意见全部重写一遍，后果怎样
已经有10人回复
- JMCA投稿后大修，返回修改稿后收到邮件，不懂什么意思啊，求大神帮忙
已经有8人回复
- BMCL文章大修，不是很理解审稿意见，求指导从哪个角度进行文章修改
已经有6人回复
- 这个算是大改还是小改？
已经有7人回复
- 论文第二次让大修！
已经有20人回复
- 同一篇论文连续第三次给大修有没有啊？
已经有24人回复
- 论文一审回来后，大修，但是想更换些好的实验数据，可否？
已经有5人回复
- SCI文章大修,四个审稿人,有一个不同意发表,大修返回后,据的这个审稿人态度会改变吗
已经有15人回复
- 请教：论文大修，机会大不大？三个月修改期限，多长时间提交修改稿较好？谢谢！
已经有11人回复
- 稿件被编辑婉拒后，还可以再投给该期刊的其他编辑吗？
已经有19人回复
- 论文大修 郁闷
已经有19人回复
- 被一个杂志据稿，但是编辑说按照要求修改可以重投稿，如何回编辑的信件？
已经有8人回复
- 文章大修，修改期限降至，能不能向主编申请延期上交修改稿件？
已经有6人回复
- 论文被拒，编辑意见改后重投
已经有15人回复
- 请问这种情况是大修还是小修，另外reviewer的建议需不需要改？
已经有7人回复
- 文章大修，修改列表需要重复point-to-point 的修改细节吗？
已经有8人回复
- 论文大修，问题一大堆，修改意见四页多，修后录用可能性大不？
已经有30人回复
wangzhipengj
至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
- 应助: 240 (大学生)
- 金币: 21356.1
- 散金: 5
- 红花: 43
- 帖子: 10888
- 在线: 551.1小时
- 虫号: 1702123
- 注册: 2012-03-19
- 专业: 高分子合成化学
4楼2012-09-06 13:05:39
carsonwen
铜虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 1 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 177.4
- 散金: 10
- 帖子: 71
- 在线: 11.6小时
- 虫号: 44277
- 注册: 2004-04-24
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 信息处理方法与技术
2楼2012-09-06 10:30:45
【答案】应助回帖
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
smallbug2000: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2012-09-06 14:45:35
smallbug2000: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2012-09-06 17:37:34
smallbug2000: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2012-09-11 19:27:09
smallbug2000: 金币+4, ★★★★★最佳答案 2012-09-13 14:47:15
感谢参与，应助指数 +1
smallbug2000: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2012-09-06 14:45:35
smallbug2000: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2012-09-06 17:37:34
smallbug2000: 金币+2, ★★★很有帮助 2012-09-11 19:27:09
smallbug2000: 金币+4, ★★★★★最佳答案 2012-09-13 14:47:15
|
这个修改意见不算多的，具体就是： 1、增加实验结果以验证你方法的有效性；（这个只要有数据，应该好办） 2、局部最优问题，这个较难回答，一种你找到方法；另外一种就是通过实验来说明； 3、与不同算法的比较。首先找找网上有没有现成的能出结果的代码吧；实在不行只有自己实现；话说实验室如果有做换个方向的话应该是有一定基础吧。 强烈建议：按照专家意见修改，不要回避，最终你会发现有收获的！！  |
3楼2012-09-06 12:27:52
寒山听雪
铁虫 (小有名气)
- 应助: 4 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 67.2
- 散金: 14
- 帖子: 80
- 在线: 24.3小时
- 虫号: 1894930
- 注册: 2012-07-16
- 性别: GG
- 专业: 生物信息学
5楼2012-09-06 15:42:20
28