Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE/RSJ
International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems
October 9 - 15, 2006, Beijing, China
Learning Trafc Patterns at Intersections by
Spectral Clustering of Motion Trajectories
Stefan Atev, Osama Masoud, and Nikos Papanikolopoulos
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN
Abstract We address the problem of automatically learning
the layout of a trafc intersection from trajectories of vehicles
obtained by a vision tracking system. We present a similarity
measure which is suitable for use with spectral clustering in
problems that emphasize spatial distinctions between vehicle
trajectories. The robustness of the method to small perturbations
and its sensitivity to the choice of parameters are evaluated using
real-world data.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Automatic identication and tracking of vehicles in clut-
tered outdoor scenes is a challenging problem for which
different solution approaches have been proposed. Systems
such as those by [1][4] collect vehicle trajectory data, either
as a by-product of their operation, or as their ultimate goal.
The focus of this work is on learning the layout and xed
ingress/egress structure of a trafc intersection automatically,
once moving object trajectories are extracted from a video clip
by any convenient method.
Knowledge of the xed intersection structure enables the
computation of statistics that are of interest to trafc engineers,
such as: turning gap times for left and right turns, headway
times, lane change and U-turn event counts, as well as detailed
trafc volume information. Automatic identication of the
structure of an intersection reduces operator input required for
the use of trafc data collection systems and eliminates the
nuisance of manually modeling the structure of trafc scenes
of interest. While camera calibration is still required for our
trajectory collection method, the amount of manually specied
data required for the operation of the data collection system
is signicantly reduced.
Our work bears most similarity to the approach of [5], where
spectral clustering is applied to extract trajectory patterns
using a similarity measure between Hidden Markov Model
parameterizations of the trajectories. Unlike [5], we measure
trajectory similarity directly, not in a derived feature space;
further differences are in our use of automatic local scaling
of the afnity matrix and in the determination of the optimal
number of clusters. A paper by [6] investigates agglomerative
clustering of trajectories obtained by a multiple-hypothesis,
EKF-based tracker; the similarity measure is computed from
projections of trajectories on coordinate axes, and is closely
related to methods used by the data mining community.
Methods for comparing multidimensional time sequences
are actively being developed for data mining and retrieval
applications, with emphasis placed on deriving similarity
1-4244-0259-X/06/$20.00 2006 IEEE
4851
measures with certain invariance properties. For example, [7]
proposes a similarity measure for moving object trajectories
based on an extension of the symbolic Edit Distance to real se-
quences. Related work based on the Discrete Time-Wrapping
approach is presented by [8], while methods based on the
Longest Common Subsequence approach are discussed in [9].
While the time component of vehicle trajectories is somewhat
relevant to our problem, it is of secondary importance, hence
our departure from time-series similarity measures.
The spectral clustering method used in our work is derived
from the method proposed by [10], taking into account de-
velopments by [11] who proposed the use of local scaling
to handle both multi-scale data and background clutter. The
asymmetric nature of the local scaling method is a natural
t for the directed Hausdorff distance, which we generalize
for use with vehicle trajectories. A similar modied Hausdorff
distance allowing for partial matching of image edge templates
was introduced by [12]. The partial matching formulation was
developed further in [13] to increase the robustness of object
matching in the presence of noise; the authors also investigate
in detail various modications of the Hausdorff distance that
are related to our approach.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: In Section II
we summarize our method for collecting trajectory data from
video sequences. Section III presents our trajectory similarity
measure and discusses the motivation for its choice. Trajec-
tory preprocessing and clustering using a spectral method is
described in Section IV. Experiments and results are discussed
in Section V, and our conclusions and future investigative
endeavors appear in Section VI.
II. T RAJECTORY DATA C OLLECTION
The vehicle tracking algorithm we employ is not the focus
of this work, but we will briey explain it for completeness of
exposition. We collect trajectories using a region-based vehicle
tracker capable of handling temporary static and dynamic
occlusions. All output variables of the tracker are reported
in real-world units, using camera calibration data obtained
by a primitive-based calibration procedure. In addition to
position and velocity data, the tracker estimates the real-world
dimensions of tracked objects, which enables the system to
differentiate between pedestrians and vehicles.
The tracking module uses an adaptive background model
for moving object segmentation based on per-pixel mixtures
of Gaussians in RGB color space. To improve the robustness
of the system, a brightness/contrast rate-limiting controller is
used to lter out sudden and transient changes of illumination
in the input video. In addition, a camera vibration compensa-
tion system is used to ensure that the input reects the static
camera assumption made by the tracker. The binarized output
of the background segmentation is processed morphologically,
and connected regions are extracted.
The frame-to-frame overlap of connected regions is used
to compute region associations. Targets are modeled as sets
of associated connected regions, and their internal state is
estimated using an Extended Kalman Filter to reect the
non-linearity of the perspective projection. The sequence of
Kalman updates itself is recorded in order to allow for the
trajectories to be rened using Kalman smoothing when a
target leaves the trafc scene. A direct geometrical approach
based on 3-point perspective is used to t 3D bounding
boxes to the moving objects outlines. This allows accurate
localization of vehicles on the ground plane and provides
reasonable estimates of the width, length, and height of the
tracked objects. The raw trajectory output of the tracker on a
T-shaped intersection is shown in Fig. 1.
For more details on the tracking algorithm, refer to the
descriptions in [14], [15].
8500
7500
6500
5500
4500
3500
2500
1500
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Fig. 1. Output from the tracker at a T-shaped intersection (centimeter-scale
grid, 386 trajectories total). The Kalman smoothing results in very clean
trajectories.
III. S IMILARITY M EASURE
Trafc signals, pedestrians and congestion contribute to a
the large variation in the fashion by which two different vehi-
cles may make their way through a trafc intersection. While
time-related attributes reveal important information about the
activities taking place at a trafc scene, they are irrelevant to
the task of determining its physical layout. This suggests the
use of a spatial-only similarity measure, and ignoring the time
dimension of trajectories. However, we may lose the ability
to discriminate between trafc ow in opposing directions by
completely ignoring the time component of points on a trajec-
tory. We address this issue by augmenting an essentially spatial
4852
similarity measure with a curve parameterization that reects
the chronological order of the points in a trajectory. Lastly, we
cannot allow for partial matches between trajectories as this
may lead to an inconsistent clustering, as shown by [16].
A. Requirements and Motivation
Spectral clustering works by considering one or more
eigenvalues of an afnity matrix between the elements being
clustered. An ideal similarity measure in that sense is one that
produces a block-diagonal afnity matrix [11]. Let s(P, Q)
be the similarity between for two trajectories P and Q,
represented as ordered sequences of points on the ground plane
(i.e., P = {pt }0t<Tp and Q = {qt }0t<Tq ). The design goals
for s(P, Q) that reect the optimality criterion are:
1) s(P, Q) must tend to 1 if P and Q are the trajectories of
vehicles that passed through the same part of the scene,
in the same direction.
2) s(P, Q) must tend to 0 in other cases.
3) s(P, Q) = s(Q, P ).
B. Modied Hausdorff Distance
The Hausdorff distance from the set P to the set Q is dened
as:  
h(P, Q) = max min d(p, q) , (1)
pP qQ
where d(p, q) is any metric. In the case of trajectories, d(p, q)
is taken to be the Euclidean metric. The distance dened by
(1) is a semi-metric, which is usually extended to a metric by
dening H(P, Q) = max(h(P, Q), h(Q, P )), which is known
as the Hausdorff distance between the sets P and Q.
The Hausdorff distance suffers from some well-known de-
ciencies its sensitivity to outliers, and its complete disregard
for the structure of the underlying sets. While the unmodied
Hausdorff distance has been successfully used in template
and curve matching, it is inadequate for the aforementioned
purposes since it fails to account for the direction in which a
trajectory is traversed. Another shortcoming of the distance is
illustrated by the example in Fig. 2.
A
B
Fig. 2. Two sets with a small Hausdorff distance. The intuitive notion of
similarity between trajectories is not reected by the Hausdorff distance in
this case, since the structure of the sets is ignored.
We address the task-specic deciencies of the Hausdorff
distance by imposing a structure on the underlying sets and
by ignoring a portion of the worst-matching points between
the two sets:
 
h (P, Q) = ord min d(p, q) , (2)
pP qN (C(p))
where N (q) is the neighborhood of q within Q, C(p) is
the set of points from Q that correspond to a point p from
P , and ord pP f (p) denotes the value of f (p) that is larger
than a fraction of all values of f over P (e.g. = 0.5
corresponds to the median). Note that the directed Hausdorff
distance is a special case of (2) since h(P, Q) = h1 (P, Q) for
any combination of N and C that satises N (C(p)) = Q for
all p P .
A choice of < 1 means that matches between trajectories
can be partial, but h (P, Q) will be robust to the presence
of about (1 )|P | outliers. Applications that require h to
be thresholded must account for the fact that h is a non-
decreasing function of .
The choice of the neighborhood structure N is motivated
by the desire to avoid the situation exemplied by Fig. 2, yet
allow for a certain degree of slack in the matching of the two
trajectories. Since we are interested in the spatial properties of
trajectories, we base our choice of N on the relative distance
along the trajectory itself and the point of interest q Q:
N (q) = {r Q|(r, q)/L(Q) < w},
where w is a threshold, (r, q) is the length of the portion of
the trajectory Q that lies between the points r and q, and L(Q)
denotes the length of Q. The measure h is a non-increasing
function of w.
The last parameter that needs specication is the correspon-
dence mapping C. The denition of C ensures that we traverse
the two trajectories in chronological order, so that the direction
of trajectories is taken into account. We dene C(p) to be the
point on Q that is at the same relative distance Q from the start
of Q as p is relative to the initial point of P . More precisely,
C(p) = argmin |(p0 , p)/L(P ) (q0 , q)/L(Q)|.
qQ
The shaded region in Fig. 3 illustrates the set of points on Q
to which the shortest distance from p P is computed.
N(C(p))
C(p)
q0
p0
p
(p0,p)
Fig. 3. An illustration of the structural neighborhood N , the correspondence
C and other quantities relevant to the denition of h .
The denition of h can be extended to continuous rep-
resentations of the trajectories if generalized order statistics
are used, and in fact our denition is an approximation of
the continuous case, with irregular sampling (we sample at
xed time intervals, not xed length increments). An argument
in favor of irregular sampling can be made based on the
observation that slowly moving vehicles can turn with a
smaller turning radius, so more closely spaced points may
be necessary to capture the shape of the resulting high-
curvature trajectory (turning radius is inversely proportional
to curvature). Since the distance between consecutive points
along a trajectory is very small relative to the total length of
the collected trajectories even for fast moving vehicles, the
approximation is good enough and we forgo any resampling
of the trajectories.
C. Local Scaling
Once the parameters and w are xed, the denition of the
modied directed Hausdorff distance is complete. We can now
use the distance h (P, Q) to dene the similarity between the
trajectories P and Q, in the fashion proposed by [11]:
1
s(P, Q) = e 2 h (P,Q)h (Q,P )/(P Q ) , (5)
where P and Q are local scale estimates that reect the
density of the neighborhoods of P and Q in the space induced
by h . The interpretation of (5) is that h (P, Q)/P is the
distance from P to Q viewed on a scale representative of P s
neighbors in trajectory space, and likewise for h (Q, P )/Q .
The resulting similarity measure is symmetric for any h , and
(3) is equivalent to the traditional denition of afnity based on
2 2
a metric d as ed /2 when h turns out to be symmetric.
We select the local scale P for a trajectory P automatically
as the distance h (P, R) to P s 9-th nearest neighbor R (as
viewed from P ). The choice of the 9-th neighbor gives good
results, but any small integer constant would be appropriate.
IV. T RAJECTORY C LUSTERING
A. Trajectory Preprocessing
There are two issues that we must address before clustering
can be applied pedestrian trajectories must be removed
from the trajectory set reported by the tracker, and a method
(4) for dealing with outliers (caused by tracking failures) must
be developed. Since we do not need to cluster all trajectories
in order to determine the layout of an intersection, we have
signicant leeway in removing trajectories from consideration,
and we can afford to err on the side of caution when choosing
the input to the clustering method. In the further discussion,
let P be a T -point trajectory for an object of dimensions w l
Q as provided by the tracker. The information available to us at
each time instant t 0 . . . T 1 is the position pt (xt , yt ) of
P the object in the ground plane, and its instantaneous velocity
st (ut , vt ).
All of the following rules must be satised by trajectories
that are chosen to be clustered. If any of the rules is not
satised, we consider the trajectory P undesirable and ignore
it from further consideration:
T > 90 (6)
(l > w) w [1m, 4m] l [1.5m, 6.5m] (7)
max st  [10km/h, 100km/h] (8)
0t<T
pt pt+  2
max > (9)
0t<t+ <T (pt , pt+ ) 2
The rst rule simply rejects trajectories of length 90, which
corresponds to 3 seconds given our trackers sampling rate
of 30 Hz. The rule (7) reects the observation that vehicles
are invariably longer than wider and provides a range of
4853
acceptable absolute vehicle dimensions. The rule (8) rejects
all objects that never move faster than 10 km/h (which is a
reasonable upper limit on pedestrian walking speed), or objects
that exceed a speed of 100 km/h (which typically happens
as a result of tracking failure). Finally, rule (9) imposes
a maximum curvature constraint on trajectories in order to
eliminate problems such as the one displayed in Fig. 4. The
parameter is set to a small integer, so that the computed
ratio approximates
the true curvature of the path, while the
threshold 2/2 rules out trajectories that make abrupt turns
of over 90 .
3300
2800
2300
4850 4350 3850 3350 2850 2350 1850
Fig. 4. A high-curvature, self intersecting trajectory. Typically caused by
tracking failures of vehicles waiting at a stop light, in the presence of many
occlusions.
B. Afnity Matrix Computation and Trimming
Let {Pi }1im be the trajectories that satisfy the rules
established in the previous section. We must rst compute the
m m pairwise distance matrix H as:
Hij = h (Pi , Pj ),
which gives us all information necessary for computing the 9-
(9)
th nearest neighbor Ni of each trajectory. We now remove
(9)
all trajectories Pi for which h (Pi , Ni ) exceeds a certain
threshold Tmax , as those trajectories are most likely orphans
(since even their 9-th closest neighbor is too far away). Re-
moved trajectories are put in an articial cluster for purposes
of cluster comparisons (details follow in Section V-A). In all
of our experiments, we set Tmax = 3.66m 12ft, which is the
width of lanes on most roads. For the remaining n trajectories,
we can compute the n n afnity matrix A as:
 video shaking compensation). We processed a 45 minute
0 if i = j
Aij = (11)
s(Pi , Pj ) if i = j,
where by slight abuse of notation, Pi refers to the trajectories
not removed by the trimming step.
Trimming of outliers before clustering is important since the
clustering process uses a number of clusters that is xed in
advance, which forces an outlier to be assigned to a cluster de-
spite any incompatibilities it may have with its assigned group.
One way to combat this problem is to allow for a large number
of groups, which results in outliers being assigned to clusters
with few elements that can be pruned subsequently. This
approach proved to be inferior to trimming before clustering,
since an increase in the number of clusters results in multiple
clusters even for groups of trajectories that are very similar,
it increases computation time, and articially decreases the
cluster distortion score which is used to automatically nd the
optimal number of clusters.
C. The Clustering Algorithm
Our exposition of the clustering algorithm closely follows
the description given in [10], which we reproduce here for
completeness. This particular spectral clustering method is
called the Ng-Jordan-Weiss (NJW) algorithm, and we deviate
from it only in the introduction of local scaling in the n n
afnity matrix A, which was suggested in [11]. The number
of clusters is xed to be k in advance.
1) Compute the afnity matrix A according to (11).
2) Dene D to be a diagonal matrix with Dii = 1jn Aij ,
and compute the normalized afnity matrix as L =
D1/2 AD1/2 .
3) Find x1 , x2 , . . . , xk the eigenvectors of L corresponding
to the k largest eigenvalues. In the case of repeated eigen-
values, ensure that x1 , x2 , . . . , xk are mutually orthogonal.
Form the n k matrix X = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xk ) by concate-
nating the eigenvectors.
4) Normalize each row of X to have unit length, that is, let
2
Xij Xij / 1jk Xij .
5) Cluster each row of the normalized X into k groups using
K-means. A trajectory Pi belongs to cluster j if and only if
the i-th row of X is assigned to cluster j by the K-means
procedure.
6) The ratio of the within-class scatter to between-class scatter
of the rows of X is the distortion score that indicates the
quality of the clustering.
(10) Fig. 5. The NJW clustering algorithm.
The automatic choice of the optimal number of clusters is
based on minimizing the distortion computed in the last step
of the NJW algorithm over a number of possibilities. In our
experiments, we minimized the distortion for values of k from
10 to 25.
V. E XPERIMENTS
We collected video from a major trafc intersection in a
metropolitan area. The video was shot in the early afternoon
of a sunny day with strong winds (which necessitated the
segment, which resulted in 4004 trajectories total. Note that
the number of trajectories is large for two different reasons
the intersection is very busy and sees signicant pedestrian
trafc as well, but in addition, our tracker reports trajectories
of objects that were present in the scene for as few as 10
video frames, which can result in many false object detections
during periods of high camera instability or extensive scene
clutter. Instead of compensating for such spurious trajectories
in the tracker itself, we opted for the pre-ltering process
described in Section IV-A. After ltering, 565 highly reliable
trajectories remained, on which all subsequent experiments
were performed.
A. Comparing Clusterings
In order to evaluate the sensitivity of the clustering algo-
rithm to small changes in its parameters, or to measure its
robustness to noise, we need a way to compare clusterings.
4854
Given two different k-class labelings g1 : [1, n] [1, k] and
g2 : [1, n] [1, k] of the trajectories {Pi }1in , we build a
k k concordance matrix C:

Cij = (g1 (Pk ) i)(g2 (Pk ) j), (12)
1kn
where is the Kronecker delta. If the labelings g1 and g2 agree
perfectly, C will be a (possibly permuted) diagonal matrix. We
reduce the concordance matrix to a single cluster similarity
score s by nding the least squares solution of:
(c1 , c2 , . . . , ck )T s = (m1 , m2 , . . . , mk )T , (13)
 searched for the least distortion by varying from 0.8 to 0.95
where cj = 1ik Cij and mj = max1ik Cij . A higher
s-value indicates higher similarity between the labelings g1
and g2 . If g1 and g2 are identical up to a permutation, then
s = 1.
C. Optimal Parameter Choice
The automatic choice for the number of clusters minimizes
the K-means distortion score, so we decided to use the
distortion score as the objective function to minimize over
various settings for the algorithm. The sensitivity analysis
suggests that we only need to optimize the choice of , and
need not focus on w as it affects the clustering process very
little. Our initial experimentation indicated that values of w
close to 0.5 and values of larger than 0.8 tend to produce
the least distortion in the nal clusters (as measured in the
last step of the NJW algorithm). With w xed to 0.5, we
in increments of 0.01. The graph in Fig. 8 shows the best
distortion score obtained for each value of .
x 10
4

B. Sensitivity to Parameter Choice 7

Our rst experiment was to test the sensitivity of the clus- 6

tering procedure to variation in the choice of w and , which 5

directly affects the similarity scores between trajectories. The
4
average similarity between clusterings obtained with different 0.8 0.82 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.9 0.92 0.94 0.95

parameter values and a reference clustering was obtained, for Fig. 8. Distortion scores for values of from 0.8 to 0.95. The best distortion
score of 4.22 104 is achieved at = 0.88.
values of k ranging from 10 to 25. The average similarity for
clusterings with w ranging from 0.25 to 0.75 is shown in Fig.
6. Similar results when varies from 0.5 to 0.95 are shown D. Robustness to Noise
in Fig. 7.
In order to test the signicance of using Kalman smoothing
1.025 on the trajectories reported by the tracker, we tried adding
1 Gaussian noise of different magnitude to each point in the
0.975 trajectories. By adding noise similar in level to the error
0.95 covariance of the Kalman lter while tracking, we effectively
0.925
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 cancel the smoothing. As Fig. 9 indicates, the clustering results
Fig. 6. Average concordance of clusterings with held constant at 0.95, at various noise levels barely differ from the clustering with
relative to the clustering with w = 0.5. The parameter w varies from 0.25 no noise added. The only notable change in this process was
to 0.75. that rule (9) rejects more trajectories, as the addition of the
noise increases the local curvature of trajectories.

1
1

0.9
0.995

0.8
0.99
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95

Fig. 7. Average concordance of clusterings with w held constant at 0.3,

0.985
relative to the clustering with = 0.95. The parameter varies from 0.5 to 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

0.95.
The choice of w is not critical to the clustering process;
as Fig. 6 reveals, the concordance of the obtained clusterings
is better than 0.95 in all cases, which means that more than
95% of the trajectories typically stayed in the same cluster
(relative to the clustering with w = 0.5). As Fig. 7 shows, the
method is more sensitive to the choice of the clustering
concordance drops to just below 0.8, and unlike the results
obtained when varying w, the disparity in obtained clusterings
grows proportionally to the difference between the values
used.
Fig. 9. Clustering sensitivity to adding Gaussian noise with standard deviation
ranging from 0cm to 10cm to every point in a trajectory. Concordance is
relative to the clustering without noise.
E. Clustering Results
The optimal clustering recovered with the settings discov-
ered in the previous sections has 11 groups and is shown in
Fig. 10. The grouping of the Southbound-Eastbound left-turn
lane with the Eastbound trafc lanes is unexpected at rst, but
can be explained by the fact that the number of left-turning
trajectories is very small (only 5 have an initial point detected

4855
during the approach to the turn). When a higher number
of groups is used, those lanes are separated, but the major
Northbound trajectories are split in more than two groups
(depending on the initial vehicle detection location). Parallel
lanes were typically clustered together when a number of lane
changes occur (as is the case with Southbound, Eastbound and
Westbound trafc). The results are excellent considering that
the scale and number of groups are automatically found. A
selected subset of the trajectories is shown projected onto the
original input video in Fig. 11.
6500
6000
5500
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
7500 7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000
Fig. 10. The resulting clustering of the trajectories with = 0.88, w = 0.5.
Fig. 11. Trajectories from each cluster overlaid onto the input video.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
We have presented a method for automatically identifying
important spatial structures of a trafc intersection using tra-
jectories of vehicles. The directed Hausdorff distance is gener-
alized by the imposition of neighborhood and correspondence
4856
structures on the sets between which distance is measured, in
order to better reect intuitive distinctions between trajectories
in the ground plane. The natural t between directed distance
measures and local scaling of similarity values in an afnity
matrix is exploited within the spectral clustering framework.
The sensitivity of the method to parameter choices and noise is
investigated using a large data set obtained automatically from
a challenging video acquired at a busy trafc intersection.
VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work has been supported in part by the National Sci-
ence Foundation through grant #IIS-0219863, the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, and the ITS Institute at the
Univeristy of Minnesota.
R EFERENCES
[1] Z. Kim and J. Malik, Fast vehicle detection with probabilistic feature
grouping and its application to vehicle tracking, in Proc. IEEE Intl
Conf. Computer Vision, vol. 1, 2003, pp. 524531.
[2] D. R. Magee, Tracking multiple vehicles using foreground, background
and motion models, Image and Vision Computing, vol. 22, no. 2, pp.
143155, Feb 2004.
[3] H. Veeraraghavan, O. Masoud, and N. P. Papanikolopoulos, Computer
vision algorithms for intersection monitoring, IEEE Trans. Intelligent
Transportation Systems, vol. 4, pp. 7889, Jun 2003.
[4] J. Badenas, J. M. Sanchiz, and F. Pla, Using temporal integration for
tracking regions in trafc monitoring sequences, in Proc. 15th Intl
Conf. Pattern Recognition, vol. 3, Sep 2000, pp. 11251128.
[5] F. Porikli, Learning object trajectory patterns by spectral clustering,
in IEEE Intl Conf. Multimedia and Expo, vol. 2, June 2004, pp. 1171
1174.
[6] D. Buzan, S. Sclaroff, and G. Kollios, Extraction and clustering of mo-
tion trajectories in video, in Proc. 17th Intl Conf. Pattern Recognition,
vol. 2, Aug 2004, pp. 521524.
[7] L. Chen, M. T. Ozsu, and V. Oria, Robust and fast similarity search
for moving object trajectories, in Proc. ACM SIGMOD Intl Conf.
Management of Data. New York, NY, USA: ACM Press, 2005, pp.
491502.
[8] M. Vlachos, D. Gunopulos, and G. Das, Rotation invariant distance
measures for trajectories. in Proc. 10th ACM SIGKDD Intl Conf.
Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Aug 2004, pp. 707712.
[9] M. Vlachos, D. Gunopoulos, and G. Kollios, Discovering similar mul-
tidimensional trajectories, in Proc. 18th Intl Conf. Data Engineering,
2002, pp. 673684.
[10] A. Y. Ng, M. I. Jordan, and Y. Weiss, On spectral clustering: Analysis
and an algorithm, in Advances in Neural Information Processing
Systems 14, T. G. Dietterich, S. Becker, and Z. Ghahramani, Eds.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002, pp. 849856.
[11] L. Zelnik-Manor and P. Perona, Self-tuning spectral clustering, in
Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 17, L. K. Saul,
Y. Weiss, and L. Bottou, Eds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005, pp.
16011608.
[12] D. P. Huttenlocher, G. A. Klanderman, and W. J. Rucklidge, Comparing
images using the Hausdorff distance, IEEE Trans. Pattern Analysis and
Machine Intelligence, vol. 15, no. 9, pp. 850863, Sep 1993.
[13] M.-P. Dubuisson and A. K. Jain, A modied Hausdorff distance for
object matching, in Proc. 12th Intl Conf. Pattern Recognition, vol. 1,
Oct 1994, pp. 566568.
[14] S. Atev, O. Masoud, R. Janardan, and N. P. Papanikolopoulos, A
collision prediction system for trafc intersections, in Proc. IEEE/RSJ
Intl Conf. Intelligent Robots and Systems, Aug 2005, pp. 169174.
[15] S. Atev, H. Arumugam, O. Masoud, R. Janardan, and N. P. Pa-
panikolopoulos, A vision-based approach to collision prediction at
trafc intersections, IEEE Trans. Intelligent Transportation Systems,
vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 416423, Dec 2005.
[16] N. Meratnia and R. A. de By, Aggregation and comparison of tra-
jectories, in Proc. 10th ACM Intl Symp. Advances in Geographic
Information Systems, Nov 2002, pp. 4954.