MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3060860733 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2020.3017384

Multi-Variate Data Fusion Technique for Reducing Sensor Errors in Intelligent Transportation Systems

2020· article· en· W3060860733 on OpenAlexaff
Gunasekaran Manogaran, Venki Balasubramanian, Bharat S. Rawal, Vijayalakshmi Saravanan, Carlos Montenegro, V. Ramachandran, Priyan Malarvizhi Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensor fusionComputer scienceProcess (computing)FusionIntelligent transportation systemReal-time computingAsynchronous communicationData modelingData miningComputationGroup method of data handlingAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Connected vehicles in intelligent transportation system (ITS) scenario rely on environmental data for supporting user-centric applications along the driving time. Sensors equipped in the vehicles are responsible for accumulating data from the environment, followed by the fusion process. Such fusion process provides accurate and stable data required for the applications in a recurrent manner. In order to enhance the data fusion of connected vehicles, this article introduces multi-variate data fusion (MVDF) technique. This technique is competent in handling asynchronous and discrete data from the environment and streamlining them into continuous and delay-less inputs for the applications. The process of data fusion is aided through least square regression learning to determine the errors in different time instances. The indefinite and definite data fusion instances are differentiated using this regression model to identify the errors in fore-hand. Besides, the differentiation relies on the application run-time interval to progress data fusion within the same or extended time instance and data slots. In this manner the differentiation along with the error identification is regular until the application required data is met. The performance of this technique is verified using network simulator experiments for the metrics error, data utilization ratio, and computation time. The results show that this technique improves data utilization under controlled time and fewer errors.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207