MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410087103 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2025.3566696

MUFFIN-HGCN: Multi-Feature Fusion Hierarchical-GCN for 3D Object Detection

2025· article· en· W4410087103 on OpenAlexaff
Chang Liu, Aimin Jiang, Jia Zhou, Yanping Zhu, Hon Keung Kwan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFusionObject detectionFeature (linguistics)Artificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Sensor fusionObject (grammar)Computer scienceComputer visionMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3D object detection play a pivotal role in various applications, such as autonomous driving and environmental perception. However, the challenging task of detecting targets (e.g., vehicles and pedestrians) in 3D point clouds obtained from LiDAR sensors is hindered by two primary factors. Firstly, point clouds are non-Euclidean data and lack rigid data properties. Secondly, these point clouds are sparse and deficient in semantic information. In this paper, we propose a novel deep learning framework for 3D object detection. The proposed approach involves two stages. Specifically, we first present an innovative fusion technique that combines images and point clouds using transformers. This technique enhances the integration of semantic and geometric features while accurately mapping points to pixels without relying on camera extrinsic parameters. Additionally, a multi-level graph convolutional network (GCN) architecture is further introduced for object detection. This architecture effectively handles the non-Euclidean characteristics of point clouds while achieving precise object identification within them. A comprehensive series of experiments on the KITTl and nuScenes datasets validate the effectiveness of the proposed framework.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.254 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207