L-Shape model based vehicle tracking with joint kinematic and geometric estimation using Lidar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the problem of tracking vehicles using lidar sensors mounted on an ego-vehicle is addressed. Due to line-of-sight limitations, the back (or front) of a vehicle as seen by the lidar on the ego-vehicle behind (or ahead of) it is often modeled as L-shaped. In this paper, an L-shape based vehicle tracking algorithm with joint kinematic and geometric estimation is presented. By feeding back tracking results to L-shape fitting, an L-shape detection method that is robust to outliers is proposed. In the L-shape tracker currently available in the literature, the kinematic and geometric states of the L-shape model are separately estimated and maintained. However, the kinematic and geometric states are not independent since the orientation of a vehicle influences its velocity. Also, the dependency between the kinematic and the geometric states is caused by anchor-point (the closest point on the vehicle being tracked) switching, which is required during changes in the relative position between vehicles. To address this limitation, the proposed L-shape tracker exploits this dependency and estimates the kinematic and geometric states jointly. The proposed L-shape model based tracking algorithm is evaluated and compared with the original algorithm using the real traffic data from the KITTI datasets. The results demonstrate the superiority of the proposed algorithm over the original algorithm in terms of L-shape detection and tracking accuracies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".