MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-Modal Structured Pruning for USV-Based Waterway Detection Based on Radar-Vision Fusion

2025· article· en· W4412446609 on OpenAlexaff
Haocheng Zhao, Runwei Guan, Liye Jia, Ka Lok Man, Yutao Yue, Limin Yu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersXi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University
KeywordsPruningComputer scienceModalArtificial intelligenceRadarComputer visionFusionSensor fusionRemote sensingGeologyTelecommunicationsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radar-vision fusion, with more reliable performance at lower cost, has been widely used in autonomous vehicles. In the waterways, the perception of unmanned surface vessels is essential for autonomous navigation. However, the large amount of computation increases the demand for high-performance computing devices and causes severe power consumption. To reduce the computational cost and ensure reliable perception performance, we need lightweight solutions for such models. In this paper, we design a novel structured pruning framework for multi-modal perception networks. Moreover, we proposed a novel structured pruning algorithm Heterogeneous Aware SynFlow (HA-SynFlow), which prunes each modality based on its SynFlow [1] score. We prune the water surface radar-vision fusion model Achelous [2], and results show 24.0% and 7.2% improvement in Frame Per Second (FPS) on GTX1650 and Jetson Orin, respectively, with a 4.4% loss in detection mAP metric. Lastly, our pure radar pruning test shows that radar helps in long-range, occlusion, and difficult scenarios in 2D object detection task.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.267
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207