Efficient Lane Detection Technique Based on Lightweight Attention Deep Neural Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For self-driving vehicles, detecting lane lines in changeable scenarios is a fundamental yet challenging task. The rise of deep learning in recent years has contributed to the thriving of autonomous driving. However, existing methods of lane detection based on deep learning have high requirements on computing environment, so their applicability is further restricted. This paper proposed an improved attention deep neural network (DNN), a lightweight semantic segmentation architecture catering for efficient computation in low memory, which contains two branches worked in different resolution. The proposed network integrates fine details captured by local interaction of pixels at high resolution into global contexts at low resolution, computing dense feature maps for prediction task. Based on the attributes of disparate feature resolution characteristics, different attention mechanisms are adopted to guide the network to effectively exploit the model parameters. The proposed network achieves comparable results with state-of-the-art methods on two popular lane detection benchmarks (TuSimple and CULane), with faster calculation efficiency at 259 frames-per-second (FPS) on CULane dataset, and the total number of model parameters only requires 1.57 M. This study provides a practical and meaningful reference for the application of lane detection in memory constrained devices.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".