MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3037270246 · doi:10.1155/2020/8896826

A Calculation Method for Vehicle Movement Reconstruction from Videos

2020· article· en· W3037270246 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hao Feng, Weiguo Shi, Feng Chen, Young-Ji Byon, Weiwei Heng, Shaoyou Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai MunicipalityDepartment of Education and KnowledgeNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer sciencePerspective (graphical)CalibrationConsistency (knowledge bases)Computer visionTransformation (genetics)Movement (music)syncTrack (disk drive)Phase (matter)Artificial intelligenceSimulationMathematicsAcousticsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a new enhanced method based on one-dimensional direct linear transformation for estimating vehicle movement states in video sequences. The proposed method utilizes a contoured structure of target vehicles, and the data collection procedure is found to be relatively stable and effective, providing a better applicability. The movements of vehicles in the video are captured by active calibration regions while the spatial consistency between the vehicle’s driving track and the calibration information are in sync. The vehicle movement states in the verification phase are estimated using the proposed method first, and then the estimated states are compared with the actual movement states recorded in the experimental test. The results show that, in the case of camera perspective of 90 degrees, in all driving states of low speed, high speed, or deceleration, the error between estimated speed and recorded speed is less than 1.5%, the error of accelerations is less than 7%, and the error of distances is less than 2%; similarly, in the case of camera perspective of 30 degrees, the errors of speeds, distances, and accelerations are less than 4%, 5%, and 10%, respectively. It is found that the proposed method is superior to other existing methods.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced Transportation→Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→