MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401113673 · doi:10.1109/wfpst58552.2024.00020

Deep Learning-based Road Object Detection for Collision Avoidance in Autonomous Driving

2024· article· en· W4401113673 on OpenAlexaffabout
Teena Sharma, Abdellah Chehri, I. Fofana, Benoît Debaque, Nicolas Duclos, Siddhartha Khare

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsThales (Canada)Royal Military College of CanadaUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollision avoidanceComputer scienceObject detectionArtificial intelligenceObject (grammar)Computer visionCollisionDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)Computer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the population in metro cities rising, traffic congestion has become a significant issue, resulting in an alarming number of traffic collisions and road accidents. Given the advancements in automated vehicles, it is crucial to have a vehicle detection system that is equipped to handle the various challenges that arise on the road, particularly when it comes to traffic collisions. Although many datasets are available to support object detection for traffic monitoring and management, the suitability of these datasets for specific weather conditions across the globe needs to be analyzed. We present Canadian vehicle datasets (CVD) and analyze the YOLOv8-based deep learning model using CVD. Thales, Canada, captured street-level videos in Quebec City, Canada, with a vehicle equipped with a high-quality RGB camera. The videos are taken day and night in all four seasons: rain, snow, hazy, and bright sunlight. We created 27378 labels for 11 classes for 8000 images. The YOLOv8 model trained on the publicly available roboFlow dataset was compared to the model trained on the combined roboflow and our weather-specific CVD.

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 score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207