MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050870753 · doi:10.13031/2013.12349

Factors Contributing to Guidance Performance when Using a CameraâBased Guidance Aid

2003· article· en· W2050870753 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Safety and Health · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSimulation and Modeling Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTilt (camera)Field of viewComputer visionArtificial intelligenceOpticsComputer sciencePhysicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A guidance aid is a device that provides guidance information to the driver rather than replacing the driver. With a camera-based guidance aid, the view seen by a forward-looking video camera is displayed on a monitor situated within the operator station of the vehicle. As the vehicle moves forward, images of the ground scroll vertically across the monitor. The rate at which the image scrolls, the image velocity, is related to the forward velocity of the vehicle, the placement of the camera (height and tilt angle), and the optical characteristics of the guidance camera. When tested with a tractor at forward velocities between 1.6 and 12.8 km/h, lateral error increased linearly as image velocity increased. Driver self-confidence decreased linearly as image velocity increased. Based on subjective feedback, drivers preferred a camera tilt angle of 20 degrees (over either 30 degrees or 40 degrees) because it yielded the greatest look-ahead distance. Statistically, a tilt angle of 30 degrees was best for a camera with a narrow field of view (narrow FOV, 20 degrees in the lateral direction). For a camera with a wide field of view (wide FOV, 39 degrees in the lateral direction), there was no statistical difference. For the narrow FOV camera, a camera height of 1.1 m yielded statistically smaller lateral errors than a camera height of 1.5 m. There was no statistical difference for the wide FOV camera. Overall, the lateral error was statistically smaller for the narrow FOV camera than for the wide FOV camera due to the difference in the lateral ratio for each camera, where the lateral ratio is the ratio of the lateral field of view of the camera to the fixed monitor width.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it