On the Safety of Autonomous Driving: A Dynamic Deep Object Detection Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">To improve the safety of automated driving, the paramount target of this intelligent system is to detect and segment the obstacle such as car and pedestrian, precisely. Object detection in self-driving vehicle has chiefly accomplished by making decision and detecting objects through each frame of video. However, there are diverse group of methods in both machine learning and machine vision to improve the performance of system. It is significant to factor in the function of the time in the detection phase. In other word, considering the inputs of system, which have been emitted from eclectic type of sensors such as camera, radar, and LIDAR, as time-varying signals, can be helpful to engross ‘time’ as a fundamental feature in modeling for forecasting the object, while car is moving on the way. In this paper, we focus on eliciting a model through the time to increase the accuracy of object detection in self-driving vehicles. In fact, we designed a deep recurrent neural network, which is fed by the output of a deep convolutional neural network. Eventually, the proposed system could make a decision about each front vehicle not only by utilizing the data during a predefined span of the video, but also enhance the performance of system to determine the object as whether a car or not. Results shows that the performance of system compared to convolutional neural network based vehicle detector, is more precise in the case of discerning cars.</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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".