MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413186903 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2025-0069

AdaVIT: an Adaptive Visual-Tabular Fusion Multi-modal for road surface snow detection

2025· article· en· W4413186903 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Tong Wang, Xinhao Zhou, Lingtong Du, C. Zhang, Liping Fu, Guangyuan Pan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsModalRoad surfaceSnowComputer scienceFusionSensor fusionEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligenceGeologyEngineeringMeteorologyGeographyCivil engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Snow detection on road surfaces, especially in bare pavement lost and regain periods, is crucial for traffic safety. Traditional methods like manual observation and computer vision, encounter difficulties under complex weather and lighting conditions, with factors like snowfall intensity, temperature fluctuations, and road surfaces complicating detection. To address these limitations, we propose AdaVIT (Adaptive Visual-Tabular Fusion Multi-modal), an innovative framework for road surface snow detection that integrates real-time monitoring images with environmental data. It employs ConvNeXt for image recognition and an enhanced random forest for analysis environmental data. A feature-level multi-modal fusion strategy is designed to integrate environmental data into the image recognition process, while an adaptive feature fusion mechanism ensures an intelligent balance between different data types. Experimental results demonstrate that AdaVIT delivers optimal performance, with significant improvements in both robustness and accuracy, particularly as the dataset size increases. An ablation study further confirms the effectiveness of the proposed adaptive fusion mechanism.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207