You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
While metric learning is important for Person re-identification (RE-ID), a significant problem in visual surveillance for cross-view pedestrian matching, existing metric models for RE-ID are mostly based on supervised learning that requires quantities of labeled samples in all pairs of camera views for training. However, this limits their scalabilities to realistic applications, in which a large amount of data over multiple disjoint camera views is available but not labelled. To overcome the problem, we propose unsupervised asymmetric metric learning for unsupervised RE-ID. Our model aims to learn an asymmetric metric, i.e., specific projection for each view, based on asymmetric clustering on cross-view person images. Our model finds a shared space where view-specific bias is alleviated and thus better matching performance can be achieved. Extensive experiments have been conducted on a baseline and five large-scale RE-ID datasets to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model. Through the comparison, we show that our model works much more suitable for unsupervised RE-ID compared to classical unsupervised metric learning models. We also compare with existing unsupervised RE-ID methods, and our model outperforms them with notable margins. Specifically, we report the results on large-scale unlabelled RE-ID dataset, which is important but unfortunately less concerned in literatures.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: In this paper, we propose a novel unsupervised distance metric learning algorithm. The proposed algorithm aims to maximize a stochastic variant of the leave-one-out K-nearest neighbor (KNN) score on unlabeled data, which performs distance metric learning and clustering simultaneously. We show that the joint distance metric learning and clustering problem is formulated as a trace optimization problem, and can be solved efficiently by an iterative algorithm. Moreover, the proposed approach can also learn a low dimensional projection of high dimensional data, thus it can serve as an unsupervised dimensionality reduction tool, which is capable of performing joint dimensionality reduction and clustering. We validate our method on a number of benchmark datasets, and the results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.

[2]: A good distance metric is crucial for unsupervised learning from high-dimensional data. To learn a metric without any constraint or class label information, most unsupervised metric learning algorithms appeal to projecting observed data onto a low-dimensional manifold, where geometric relationships such as local or global pairwise distances are preserved. However, the projection may not necessarily improve the separability of the data, which is the desirable outcome of clustering. In this paper, we propose a novel unsupervised adaptive metric learning algorithm, called AML, which performs clustering and distance metric learning simultaneously. AML projects the data onto a low-dimensional manifold, where the separability of the data is maximized. We show that the joint clustering and distance metric learning can be formulated as a trace maximization problem, which can be solved via an iterative procedure in the EM framework. Experimental results on a collection of benchmark data sets demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.
Apart from our model, there have been some clustering-based metric learning models [2] [1] . However, to our best knowledge, there is no such attempt in RE-ID community before. This is potentially because clustering is more susceptible to view-specific interference and thus data points from the same view are more inclined to be clustered together, instead of those of a specific person across views. Fortunately, by formulating asymmetric learning and further limiting the discrepancy between view-specific transforms , this problem can be alleviated in our model. Therefore, our model is essentially different from these models not only in formulation but also in that our model is able to better deal with cross-view matching problem by treating each view asymmetrically. We will discuss the differences between our model and the existing ones in detail in Sec. .