MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400646293 · doi:10.1109/iv55156.2024.10588780

DICE: Diverse Diffusion Model with Scoring for Trajectory Prediction

2024· article· en· W4400646293 on OpenAlexaff
Younwoo Choi, Ray Coden Mercurius, Soheil Mohamad Alizadeh Shabestary, Amir Rasouli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiceTrajectoryComputer scienceDiffusionArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road user trajectory prediction in dynamic environments is a challenging but crucial task for various applications, such as autonomous driving. One of the main challenges in this domain is the multimodal nature of future trajectories stemming from the unknown yet diverse intentions of the agents. Diffusion models have shown to be very effective in capturing such stochasticity in prediction tasks. However, these models involve many computationally expensive denoising steps and sampling operations that make them a less desirable option for real-time safety-critical applications. To this end, we present a novel framework that leverages diffusion models for predicting future trajectories in a computationally efficient manner. To minimize the computational bottlenecks in iterative sampling, we employ an efficient sampling mechanism that allows us to maximize the number of sampled trajectories for improved accuracy while maintaining inference time in real time. Moreover, we propose a scoring mechanism to select the most plausible trajectories by assigning relative ranks. We show the effectiveness of our approach by conducting empirical evaluations on common pedestrian (UCY/ETH) and autonomous driving (nuScenes) benchmark datasets on which our model achieves state-of-the-art performance on several subsets and metrics.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207