MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312223971 · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2022.1066422

An intrinsically motivated learning algorithm based on Bayesian surprise for cognitive radar in autonomous vehicles

2022· article· en· W4312223971 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Computer Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCognitive Science and Education Research
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersMinistère de la Défense Nationale
KeywordsSurpriseComputer scienceRadarKalman filterRobustness (evolution)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMachine learningBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction This paper proposes a Bayesian surprise learning algorithm that internally motivates the cognitive radar to estimate a target's state (i.e., velocity, distance) from noisy measurements and make decisions to reduce the estimation error gradually. The work exhibits how the sensor learns from experiences, anticipates future responses, and adjusts its waveform parameters to achieve informative measurements based on the Bayesian surprise. Methods For a simple vehicle-following scenario where the radar measurements are generated from linear Gaussian state-space models, the article adopts the Kalman filter to carry out state estimation. According to the information within the filter's estimate, the sensor intrinsically assigns a surprise-based reward value to the immediate past action and updates the value-to-go function. Through a series of hypothetical steps, the cognitive radar considers the impact of future transmissions for a prescribed set of waveforms–available from the sensor profile library–to improve the estimation process. Results and discussion Numerous experiments investigate the performance of the proposed design for various surprise-based reward expressions. The robustness of the proposed method is compared to the state-of-the-art for practical and risky driving situations. Results show that the reward functions inspired by estimation credibility measures outperform their competitors when one-step planning is considered. Simulation results also indicate that multiple-step planning does not necessarily lead to lower error, particularly when the environment changes abruptly.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
Threshold uncertainty score0.681

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.282 · 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