MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285813121 · doi:10.1109/iv51971.2022.9827156

A Sufficient Condition for Convex Hull Property in General Convex Spatio-Temporal Corridors

2022· article· en· W4285813121 on OpenAlexaff
Weize Zhang, Peyman Yadmellat, Zhiwei Gao

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvex hullSmoothnessRegular polygonMathematical optimizationComputer scienceMotion planningParametric equationParametric statisticsConvex combinationProperty (philosophy)HullMathematicsConvex optimizationGeometryRobotMathematical analysisEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motion planning is one of the key modules in autonomous driving systems to generate trajectories for self-driving vehicles to follow. A common motion planning approach is to generate trajectories within semantic safe corridors. The trajectories are generated by optimizing parametric curves (e.g. Bezier curves) according to an objective function. To guarantee safety, the curves are required to satisfy the convex hull property, and be contained within the safety corridors. The convex hull property however does not necessary hold for time-dependent corridors, and depends on the shape of corridors. The existing approaches only support simple shape corridors, which is restrictive in real-world, complex scenarios. In this paper, we provide a sufficient condition for general convex, spatio-temporal corridors with theoretical proof of guaranteed convex hull property. The theorem allows for using more complicated shapes to generate spatio-temporal corridors and minimizing the uncovered search space to $O\left(\frac{1}{n^{2}}\right)$ compared to O(1) of trapezoidal corridors, which can improve the optimality of the solution. Simulation results show that using general convex corridors yields less harsh brakes, hence improving the overall smoothness of the resulting trajectories.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV)Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207