MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022272795 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2005.06582

Pedestrian Action Anticipation using Contextual Feature Fusion in Stacked RNNs

2020· article· en· W3022272795 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Rasouli, Iuliia Kotseruba, John K. Tsotsos

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnticipation (artificial intelligence)Computer sciencePedestrianArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Action (physics)Machine learningEvent (particle physics)TrajectoryPoint (geometry)Recurrent neural networkSensor fusionMotion (physics)Variable (mathematics)Computer visionArtificial neural networkEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the major challenges for autonomous vehicles in urban environments is to understand and predict other road users' actions, in particular, pedestrians at the point of crossing. The common approach to solving this problem is to use the motion history of the agents to predict their future trajectories. However, pedestrians exhibit highly variable actions most of which cannot be understood without visual observation of the pedestrians themselves and their surroundings. To this end, we propose a solution for the problem of pedestrian action anticipation at the point of crossing. Our approach uses a novel stacked RNN architecture in which information collected from various sources, both scene dynamics and visual features, is gradually fused into the network at different levels of processing. We show, via extensive empirical evaluations, that the proposed algorithm achieves a higher prediction accuracy compared to alternative recurrent network architectures. We conduct experiments to investigate the impact of the length of observation, time to event and types of features on the performance of the proposed method. Finally, we demonstrate how different data fusion strategies impact prediction accuracy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.086 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207