Berm Detection for Autonomous truck in Surface Mine Dump Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To ensure an autonomous truck can operate safely in a dump area, it is crucial to detect a berm accurately in advance. However, there are two challenges. First, the berm is not a static terrain but a movable one because of soil dumping. Second, berms are often irregular in shape-they are neither straight lines nor smooth curves. We considered two types of possible existing methods, but only to find they are not accurate and can't provide height information. Therefore, this paper proposes a berm detection algorithm, which includes three steps. First, extract berm candidate 3D LiDAR points based on a 2D height difference grid map. Second, use a binary Bayes filter to build and update 3D dynamic probability grid maps. Last, use a fitting rectangle technique to recognize the berm. We call this algorithm a Probability Grid Berm Detection (PGBD) algorithm. Off-line experimental evaluations on PGBD carried on datasets show good performance, compared with two curb detection algorithms, which are Hough Transformation and Haar Wavelet Transformation. And the good performance of the PGBD algorithm is further verified in the real-time experiment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".