MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2201330910 · doi:10.1109/iros.2015.7353858

Kernel density estimation for target trajectory prediction

2015· article· en· W2201330910 on OpenAlexafffund
Vahab Akbarzadeh, Christian Gagné, Marc Parizeau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceKernel (algebra)Cluster analysisSimilarity (geometry)Kernel density estimationProbabilistic logicArtificial intelligenceSet (abstract data type)Data miningSimilarity measureTracking (education)Machine learningMeasure (data warehouse)Pattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatisticsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes the use of a kernel density estimation to measure similarities between trajectories. The similarities are then used to predict the future locations of a target. For a given environment with a history of previous target trajectories, the goal is to establish a probabilistic framework to predict the future trajectory of currently observed targets based on their recent moves. Instead of clustering trajectories into groups, we calculate the similarity between a given test trajectory and the set of all past trajectories in a dataset. Next, we use a weighted mechanism for prediction, that can be used in target tracking and collision avoidance applications. The proposed method is compared with two other commonly used similarity models (PCA and LCSS) over a dataset of simulated trajectories, and two datasets of real observations. Results show that the proposed method significantly outperforms the existing models for those datasets and experimental settings.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207