Estimation of Steering Angle and Collision Avoidance for Automated Driving Using Deep Mixture of Experts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a monocular camera-based method is proposed to estimate the steering angle in autonomous driving. A second-order particle filtering algorithm is used to estimate the steering angles. The filtering algorithm is modeled at the scene-level for varying driving patterns. For a given road scene, individual proposal and likelihood distributions are modeled with deep learning-based regression frameworks for normal driving and obstacle avoidance driving patterns, respectively, the proposal distribution is modeled using a novel long short-term memory-based mixture-of-expert; and the likelihood is modeled using a convolutional neural network. To estimate the driving pattern captured from the monocular camera, a long recurrent convolutional network is adopted and trained. By modeling the distribution at the scene-level for different driving patterns, we accurately model the particle filter distributions. Consequently, for autonomous driving, the steering angle is robustly estimated with few particles. The proposed framework is validated on multiple acquired sequences. A detailed comparative and parametric analysis of the algorithm is performed. The experimental results demonstrate the robustness and accuracy of our filtering algorithm for varying road scenes and driving behaviors.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".