Estimating Visibility From Alternate Perspectives for Motion Planning With Occlusions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visibility is a crucial aspect of planning and control of autonomous vehicles (AV), particularly when navigating environments with occlusions. However, when an AV follows a trajectory with multiple occlusions, existing methods evaluate each occlusion individually, calculate a visibility cost for each, and rely on the planner to minimize the overall cost. This can result in conflicting priorities for the planner, as individual occlusion costs may appear to be in opposition. We solve this problem by creating an alternate perspective cost map that allows for an aggregate view of the occlusions in the environment. The value of each cell on the cost map is a measure of the amount of visual information that the vehicle can gain about the environment by visiting that location. Our proposed method identifies observation locations and occlusion targets drawn from both map data and sensor data. We show how to estimate an alternate perspective for each observation location and then combine all estimates into a single alternate perspective cost map for motion planning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it