Real-Time Robust Lane Marking Detection and Tracking for Degraded Lane Markings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Robust lane marking detection remains a challenge, particularly in temperate climates where markings degrade rapidly due to winter conditions and snow removal efforts. In previous work, dynamic Bayesian networks with heuristic features were used with the feature distributions trained using semi-supervised expectation maximization, which greatly reduced sensitivity to initialization. This work has been extended in three important respects. First, the tracking formulation used in previous work has been corrected to prevent false positives in situations where only poor RANSAC hypotheses were generated. Second, the null hypothesis is reformulated to guarantee that detected hypotheses satisfy a minimum likelihood. Third, the computational requirements have been greatly reduced by computing an upper bound on the marginal likelihood of all part hypotheses upon generation and rejecting parts with an upper bound less likely than the null hypothesis. Therefore, parts that could never surpass the null hypotheses are excluded from contributing to the <i>n</i><sup>2</sup> complexity of the tracking and pairing processes. These improvements have led to real-time operation at the frame rate of the stereo camera and robust detection results on the evaluation dataset. The evaluation and training datasets were obtained from geographically distinct regions, both with significantly degraded lane markings.</div></div>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".