An Investigation of a Convolution Neural Network Architecture for Detecting Distracted Pedestrians
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
The risk of pedestrian accidents has increased due to the distracted walking increase. The research in the autonomous vehicles industry aims to minimize this risk by enhancing the route planning to produce safer routes. Detecting distracted pedestrians plays a significant role in identifying safer routes and hence decreases pedestrian accident risk. Thus, this research aims to investigate how to use the convolutional neural networks for building an algorithm that significantly improves the accuracy of detecting distracted pedestrians based on gathered cues. Particularly, this research involves the analysis of pedestrian’ images to identify distracted pedestrians who are not paying attention when crossing the road. This work tested three different architectures of convolutional neural networks. These architectures are Basic, Deep, and AlexNet. The performance of the three architectures was evaluated based on two datasets. The first is a new training dataset called SCIT and created by this work based on recorded videos of volunteers from Sheridan College Institute of Technology. The second is a public dataset called PETA, which was made up of images with various resolutions. The ConvNet model with the Deep architecture outperformed the Basic and AlexNet architectures in detecting distracted pedestrian.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 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