Learning Driving Models From Parallel End-to-End Driving Data Set
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parallel end-to-end driving aims to improve the performance of end-to-end driving models using both simulated- and real-world data. However, how to efficiently utilize the data from both the simulated world and the real world remains a difficult issue, since these data are usually not well aligned. In this article, we build a data set called the parallel end-to-end driving data set (PED) for parallel end-to-end driving research. PED consists of 13 000 images from the simulated world and 13 000 images from the real world that are used to train the model, as well as 2700 images from the real world that are used to test the model. The simulated-world data in PED are constructed according to the real world, and each simulated-world image corresponds to a real-world image. PED also contains the vehicle measurement data (GPS, speed, steering angle, and heading direction of the vehicle) related to both the simulated- and real-world images, which are not available in some other data sets. We conduct two types of experiments to illustrate the effectiveness and the superiority of PED and explore some ways to mix the simulated-world data with the real-world data to improve the performance of end-to-end driving models.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".