MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Trajectory-Constrained Deep Latent Visual Attention for Improved Local Planning in Presence of Heterogeneous Terrain

2021· article· en· W4200066496 on OpenAlexaff
Stefan Wapnick, Travis Manderson, David Meger, Gregory Dudek

Bibliographic record

Venue2021 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMultimodal Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceTrajectoryGeneralizationTerrainConstraint (computer-aided design)Feature (linguistics)Task (project management)Computer visionCollision avoidanceVisual spaceMachine learningCollisionMathematicsEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a reward-predictive, model-based learning method featuring trajectory-constrained visual attention for use in mapless, local visual navigation tasks. Our method learns to place visual attention at locations in latent image space which follow trajectories caused by vehicle control actions to later enhance predictive accuracy during planning. Our attention model is jointly optimized by the task-specific loss and additional trajectory-constraint loss, allowing adaptability yet encouraging a regularized structure for improved generalization and reliability. Importantly, visual attention is applied in latent feature map space instead of raw image space to promote efficient planning. We validated our model in visual navigation tasks of planning low turbulence, collision-free trajectories in off-road settings and hill climbing with locking differentials in the presence of slippery terrain. Experiments involved randomized procedural generated simulation and real-world environments. We found our method improved generalization and learning efficiency when compared to no-attention and self-attention alternatives.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2021 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)Same topicMultimodal Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207