The Perception System of Intelligent Ground Vehicles in All Weather Conditions: A Systematic Literature Review
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
Perception is a vital part of driving. Every year, the loss in visibility due to snow, fog, and rain causes serious accidents worldwide. Therefore, it is important to be aware of the impact of weather conditions on perception performance while driving on highways and urban traffic in all weather conditions. The goal of this paper is to provide a survey of sensing technologies used to detect the surrounding environment and obstacles during driving maneuvers in different weather conditions. Firstly, some important historical milestones are presented. Secondly, the state-of-the-art automated driving applications (adaptive cruise control, pedestrian collision avoidance, etc.) are introduced with a focus on all-weather activity. Thirdly, the most involved sensor technologies (radar, lidar, ultrasonic, camera, and far-infrared) employed by automated driving applications are studied. Furthermore, the difference between the current and expected states of performance is determined by the use of spider charts. As a result, a fusion perspective is proposed that can fill gaps and increase the robustness of the perception system.
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) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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