MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945171433 · doi:10.1109/crv.2019.00036

aUToTrack: A Lightweight Object Detection and Tracking System for the SAE AutoDrive Challenge

2019· preprint· en· W2945171433 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keenan Burnett, Sepehr Samavi, Steven L. Waslander, Timothy D. Barfoot, Angela P. Schoellig

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Inertial measurement unitGlobal Positioning SystemComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPosition (finance)Tracking (education)Object detectionGround truthLidarPedestrianObject (grammar)Video trackingTracking systemSegmentationEngineeringGeographyKalman filterRemote sensingTransport engineeringCartographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The University of Toronto is one of eight teams competing in the SAE AutoDrive Challenge - a competition to develop a self-driving car by 2020. After placing first at the Year 1 challenge, we are headed to MCity in June 2019 for the second challenge. There, we will interact with pedestrians, cyclists, and cars. For safe operation, it is critical to have an accurate estimate of the position of all objects surrounding the vehicle. The contributions of this work are twofold: First, we present a new object detection and tracking dataset (UofTPed50), which uses GPS to ground truth the position and velocity of a pedestrian. To our knowledge, a dataset of this type for pedestrians has not been shown in the literature before. Second, we present a lightweight object detection and tracking system (aUToTrack) that uses vision, LIDAR, and GPS/IMU positioning to achieve state-of-the-art performance on the KITTI Object Tracking benchmark. We show that aUToTrack accurately estimates the position and velocity of pedestrians, in real-time, using CPUs only. aUToTrack has been tested in closed-loop experiments on a real self-driving car, and we demonstrate its performance on our dataset.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207