MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Scalable Multi-Task Learning R-CNN for Object Detection in Autonomous Driving

2023· article· en· W4384945971 on OpenAlexafffund
Sonam Rinchen, Binod Vaidya, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceObject detectionScalabilityArtificial intelligenceTask (project management)Construct (python library)Object (grammar)SegmentationDeep learningField (mathematics)Machine learningVideo trackingComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-task learning (MTL) is a rapidly growing field in the world of autonomous vehicles, particularly in the area of computer vision. Autonomous vehicles are heavily reliant on computer vision technology for tasks such as object detection, object segmentation, and object tracking. The complexity of sensor data and the multiple tasks involved in autonomous driving can make it challenging to design effective systems. MTL addresses these challenges by training a single model to perform multiple tasks simultaneously, utilizing shared representations to learn common concepts between a group of related tasks, and improving data efficiency. In this paper, we propose a scalable MTL system for object detection that can be used to construct any MTL network with different scales and shapes. The proposed system is an extension of the Mask R-CNN. It is designed to overcome the limitations of learning multiple objects in multi-label learning. We have a typical network and evaluated its performance on the Berkeley Deep Drive 100KBDD100k dataset. The experimental results demonstrate that the proposed MTL network outperforms a base single-task network, Mask RCNN, in terms of mean average precision at 50 (mAP50). Furthermore, we have also conducted a comparison with the existing representative approaches.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.285
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207