Classifying Pedestrian Actions In Advance Using Predicted Video Of Urban Driving Scenes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fig. 1.Generating predictions of a future for a pedestrian attempting to cross the street. We pick out two key frames from the (a) input sequence and the (b) ground truth sequence, 16 frames apart. Image (c) shows our prediction at the same time instant as the ground truth.We explore prediction of urban pedestrian actions by generating a video future of the traffic scene, and show promising results in classifying pedestrian behaviour before it is observed. We compare several encoder-decoder network models that predict 16 frames (400-600 milliseconds of video) from the preceding 16 frames. Our main contribution is a method for learning a sequence of representations to iteratively transform features learnt from the input to the future. Then we use a binary action classifier network for determining a pedestrian's crossing intent from predicted video. Our results show an average precision of 81%, significantly higher than previous methods. The model with the best classification performance runs for 117 ms on commodity GPU, giving an effective look-ahead of 416 ms.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it