MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895335941 · doi:10.1109/tits.2018.2868168

Joint 2-D–3-D Traffic Sign Landmark Data Set for Geo-Localization Using Mobile Laser Scanning Data

2018· article· en· W2895335941 on OpenAlexaff
Changbin You, Chenglu Wen, Cheng Wang, Jonathan Li, Ayman Habib

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLandmarkLaser scanningJoint (building)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceSign (mathematics)Computer scienceData setSet (abstract data type)Pattern recognition (psychology)LaserEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsOpticsStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a framework to build a joint 2-D-3-D traffic sign landmark data set for geo-localization using mobile laser scanning (MLS) data. The MLS data include 3-D point clouds and corresponding multi-view images. First, an integrated method, based on a deep learning network and the retro-reflective properties of traffic signs, is developed to accurately extract traffic signs from MLS point clouds. Next, the semantic and spatial properties of the traffic signs (type, location, position, and geometric characteristics) are obtained. Then, a joint 2-D-3-D traffic sign landmark data set is built, and a semantic-spatial organization graph is used to organize the traffic sign data set. Last, based on the traffic sign landmark data set, a geo-localization method for a driving car is proposed to estimate the driving trajectory. It can be used for auxiliary positioning of autonomous vehicles. Experimental results demonstrate the reliability of our proposed method for traffic sign detection and the potential of building 2-D-3-D traffic sign landmark data set for driving trajectory estimation from MLS data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207