Vision-based environmental perception for autonomous driving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual perception plays an important role in autonomous driving. One of the primary tasks is object detection and identification. Since the vision sensor is rich in color and texture information, it can quickly and accurately identify various road information. The commonly used technique is based on extracting and calculating various features of the image. The recent development of deep learning-based method has better reliability and processing speed and has a greater advantage in recognizing complex elements. For depth estimation, vision sensor is also used for ranging due to their small size and low cost. Monocular camera uses image data from a single viewpoint as input to estimate object depth. In contrast, stereo vision is based on parallax and matching feature points of different views, and the application of Deep learning also further improves the accuracy. In addition, Simultaneous Location and Mapping (SLAM) can establish a model of the road environment, thus helping the vehicle perceive the surrounding environment and complete the tasks. In this paper, we introduce and compare various methods of object detection and identification, then explain the development of depth estimation and compare various methods based on monocular, stereo, and RGB-D sensors, next review and compare various methods of SLAM, and finally summarize the current problems and present the future development trends of vision technologies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".