MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Novel Benchmarking Paradigm and a Scale- and Motion-Aware Model for Egocentric Pedestrian Trajectory Prediction

2024· article· en· W4401414548 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Rasouli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianTrajectoryBenchmarkingComputer scienceScale (ratio)Motion (physics)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionGeographyTransport engineeringEngineeringCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a new paradigm for evaluating egocentric pedestrian trajectory prediction algorithms. Based on various contextual information, we extract driving scenarios for a meaningful and systematic approach to identifying challenges for prediction models. In this regard, we also propose a new metric for more effective ranking within the scenario-based evaluation. We conduct extensive empirical studies of existing models on these scenarios to expose shortcomings and strengths of different approaches. The scenario-based analysis highlights the importance of using multimodal sources of information and challenges caused by inadequate modeling of ego-motion and scale of pedestrians. To this end, we propose a novel egocentric trajectory prediction model that benefits from multimodal sources of data fused in an effective and efficient step-wise hierarchical fashion and two auxiliary tasks designed to learn more robust representation of scene dynamics. We conduct empirical evaluation on common benchmark datasets and show that our model not only achieves state-of-the-art performance, but also significantly improves performance by up to 39% in challenging scenarios, such as high ego-speed, compared to the past arts<sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sup>.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

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 head0.207
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207