MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402464126 · doi:10.11159/mvml24.117

Paintedpillars: Efficient 3D Object Detection Using Only StatisticalProcessing To Compute Pillar Features with Explicit Class Probability Distributions

2024· article· en· W4402464126 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masayuki Miyama

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePillarClass (philosophy)Object (grammar)Probability distributionArtificial intelligenceObject detectionProbability density functionPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In autonomous driving technology, high-speed and highly accurate three-dimensional object detection is necessary to accurately grasp the surrounding environment, and it is important to integrate information from multiple sensors.Conventional methods have performed 3D object detection by combining distance information from LiDAR (Light Detection And Ranging) and texture information from camera images, but there were issues with the amount of calculation and accuracy.Therefore, we propose a new method called PaintedPillars that explicitly assigns a class probability distribution to each pillar.Here, a pillar is a column-shaped space extending vertically into each division of a horizontal plane divided into a grid in a three-dimensional space.The proposed method, through statistical processing for each pillar, calculates class probability distributions from the semantic segmentation results of camera images, and obtains the spatial distribution of points from LiDAR data.In other words, the feature values for each pillar required for threedimensional object detection, that is, object type discrimination and bounding box estimation, are obtained using only statistical processing.The amount of calculation is proportional to the product of the number of points and the number of input channels, and does not depend on the number of output channels, so it is less than the conventional method using neural networks.Furthermore, the problem of reduced accuracy due to padding does not occur.Compared to the conventional PointPainting, experiments showed that the detection accuracy of the proposed method was 1 % higher, and the execution time and GPU memory usage were reduced to 33 % and 60 %, respectively, demonstrating its effectiveness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science→Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications→French-language works237,207→