MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3180629550 · doi:10.1109/crv52889.2021.00021

RADDet: Range-Azimuth-Doppler based Radar Object Detection for Dynamic Road Users

2021· article· en· W3180629550 on OpenAlexaff
Ao Zhang, Farzan Erlik Nowruzi, Robert Laganière

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced SAR Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinimum bounding boxComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBounding overwatchComputer visionAzimuthRadarDeep learningObject detectionRange (aeronautics)Doppler radarRadar imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)MathematicsEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Object detection using automotive radars has not been explored with deep learning models in comparison to the camera based approaches. This can be attributed to the lack of public radar datasets. In this paper, we collect a novel radar dataset that contains radar data in the form of Range-AzimuthDoppler tensors along with the bounding boxes on the tensor for dynamic road users, category labels, and 2D bounding boxes on the Cartesian Bird-Eye-View range map. To build the dataset, we propose an instance-wise auto-annotation method. Furthermore, a novel Range-Azimuth-Doppler based multiclass object detection deep learning model is proposed. The algorithm is a one-stage anchor-based detector that generates both 3D bounding boxes and 2D bounding boxes on RangeAzimuth-Doppler and Cartesian domains, respectively. Our proposed algorithm achieves 56.3% AP with IOU of 0.3 on 3D bounding box predictions, and 51.6% with IOU of 0.5 on 2D bounding box prediction. Our dataset and the code can be found at https://github.com/ZhangAoCanada/RADDet.git.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.009

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations125
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced SAR Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207