An evaluation of machine learning methods for speed-bump detection on a GoPro dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Every day, new applications arise relying on the use of high-resolution road maps in both academic and industrial environments. Autonomous vehicles rely on digital maps to navigate when optical sensors cannot be trusted, such as heavy rainfalls, snowy conditions, fog, and other situations. These situations increase the risks of accidents and disable the potentials of real-time mapping sensors. To tackle those problems, we present a methodology to automatically map anomalies on the road, namely speed bumps in this study, using an off-the-shelf camera (GoPro) and Machine Learning (ML) algorithms. We acquired data over a series of differently shaped speed bumps and applied three classification techniques: Naive Bayes, Multi-Layer Perceptron, and Random Forest (RF). With over 96% of classification accuracy, then RF was able to identify speed bumps on a GoPro dataset automatically. The results show a potential of the proposed methodology to be developed in surveying vehicles to produce highly-detailed maps of vertical road anomalies with a fast and accurate update rate.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".