The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Object Detection for Autonomous Vehicles with Sensor-based Technology Using YOLO
Open accessAbstract
The year 2020 has been a tough year with the global pandemic situation, and the utmost priority is to live in a clean, green, and safe environment.One of the areas that the governments are emphasizing for the readiness of our ecosystem is autonomous and contactless environments in adapting to the new norm.Thus, Autonomous Vehicle (AV) is a promising technology to bring forward.One of the critical aspects of Autonomous Navigation is object detection.Most AV use multiple sensors to detect objects, such as cameras, radar and Light Detection and Ranging sensor (LiDAR).Nowadays, the LiDAR sensor is widely implemented due to the ability to detect objects in the form of pulsed lasers, benefiting in low-light object detection.However, even with advanced technology, poor programming can affect the performance of object detection system.Thus, the study explores the state-of-the-art of You Only Look Once (YOLO) algorithms namely Tiny-YOLO and Complex-YOLO for object detection on KITTI dataset.Their performances were compared based on accuracy, precision, and recall metrics.The results showed that the Complex-YOLO has better performance as the mean average precision is higher than the Tiny-YOLO model when tested with equal parameters.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“| YOLOv2, YOLOv3 [83] | mAP, Precision, Recall | Complex YOLO outperformed Tiny-YOLO with a mean Average Precision of 0.217. | KITTI Dataset |”
From The YOLO Framework: A Comprehensive Review of Evolution, Applications, and Benchmarks in Object Detection (2024) · cites this paper as [83]
Citations
Cites
Car Detection using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Comparison between Faster R-CNN and YOLOv3
Benjdira, B., Khursheed, T., Koubaa, A., Ammar, A., & Ouni, K. (2019) · 2019 1st International Conference on Unmanned Vehicle Systems-Oman (UVS) · doi:10.1109/uvs.2019.8658300 · Cited by 307
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ali, M. L., & Zhang, Z. (2024) · Computers · doi:10.3390/computers13120336 · Cited by 383
Object Detection Performance Evaluation for Autonomous Vehicles in Sandy Weather Environments
Aloufi, N., Alnori, A., Thayananthan, V., & Basuhail, A. (2023) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app131810249 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Dazlee, N. M. A. A., Khalil, S. A., Abdul-Rahman, S., & Mutalib, S.
- Affiliations
- Universiti Teknologi MARA System (MY)
- Corresponding author
- Abdul-Rahman, Shuzlina
- Venue
- International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering
- Published
- 2022-03-31
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 129-134
- ISSN
- 2147-6799 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4214806541
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 4.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering (publishedVersion)
- International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Universiti Teknologi MARA (600-IRMI/FRGS 5/3, 600-IRMI/FRGS)
- Division of Mathematical Sciences
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
- Keywords
- autonomous vehicles, object detection, YOLO, Tiny-YOLO, LiDAR, KITTI dataset, autonomous navigation, sensor fusion, model performance comparison
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review