Key Perception Technologies for Intelligent Docking in Autonomous Modular Buses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autonomous modular buses (AMBs) constitute a novel form of public transportation, enabling real‐time adjustments of module configurations and facilitating passenger exchanges in transit. This approach resolves unpleasant transfer experiences and offers a potential solution to traffic congestion. However, while most existing research concentrates on logistical operations, the technical implementation of AMBs remains underexplored. This paper fills this gap by proposing key perception technologies for the docking process of AMBs, which presents a suite of sensors and segments the docking process into four stages. A late fusion‐based perception network, featuring event‐driven and periodic modules, is introduced to optimize perception by integrating multisource data. Plus, we suggest a “mutual view and coview” strategy to enhance perception accuracy in the unique scenario of docking. Experimental results demonstrate that our method achieves a substantial reduction of errors in x and y axes, as well as the heading angle compared with other state‐of‐the‐art perception methods. Our research lays the groundwork for advancements in the precise docking of AMBs, offering promising tactics for other intelligent vehicle applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".