Cited by 120Autonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Vision and Imaging

Object Detection and Classification by Decision-Level Fusion for Intelligent Vehicle Systems

Open access
Oh, Sang-Il, Kang, Hang-Bong·2017·Sensors

Abstract

To understand driving environments effectively, it is important to achieve accurate detection and classification of objects detected by sensor-based intelligent vehicle systems, which are significantly important tasks. Object detection is performed for the localization of objects, whereas object classification recognizes object classes from detected object regions. For accurate object detection and classification, fusing multiple sensor information into a key component of the representation and perception processes is necessary. In this paper, we propose a new object-detection and classification method using decision-level fusion. We fuse the classification outputs from independent unary classifiers, such as 3D point clouds and image data using a convolutional neural network (CNN). The unary classifiers for the two sensors are the CNN with five layers, which use more than two pre-trained convolutional layers to consider local to global features as data representation. To represent data using convolutional layers, we apply region of interest (ROI) pooling to the outputs of each layer on the object candidate regions generated using object proposal generation to realize color flattening and semantic grouping for charge-coupled device and Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) sensors. We evaluate our proposed method on a KITTI benchmark dataset to detect and classify three object classes: cars, pedestrians and cyclists. The evaluation results show that the proposed method achieves better performance than the previous methods. Our proposed method extracted approximately 500 proposals on a 1226 × 370 image, whereas the original selective search method extracted approximately 10 6 × n proposals. We obtained classification performance with 77.72% mean average precision over the entirety of the classes in the moderate detection level of the KITTI benchmark dataset.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/s17010207

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. [1]Dalal N. Triggs B. Histograms of oriented gradients for human detection Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR’05) Los Alamitos, CA, USA 20–25 June 2005 Volume 1 886 893
  2. [13]Oren M. Papageorgiou C. Sinha P. Osuna E. Poggio T. Pedestrian detection using wavelet templates Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition San Juan, Puerto Rico 17–19 June 1997 193 199
  3. [14]Gavrila D.M. Pedestrian detection from a moving vehicle European Conference on Computer Vision Springer Berlin, Germany 2000 37 49
  4. [21]Endres I. Hoiem D. Category independent object proposals European Conference on Computer Vision Springer Berlin, Germany 2010 575 588
  5. [24]Zitnick C.L. Dollár P. Edge boxes: Locating object proposals from edges European Conference on Computer Vision Springer Berlin, Germany 2014 391 405
  6. [59]Wang D.Z. Posner I. Voting for Voting in Online Point Cloud Object Detection Proceedings of the Robotics: Science and Systems Rome, Italy 13–17 July 2015
  7. [60]Geiger A. Wojek C. Urtasun R. Joint 3D Estimation of Objects and Scene Layout NIPS Granada, Spain 2011
  8. [62]Felzenszwalb P.F. Girshick R.B. McAllester D. Ramanan D. Object Detection with Discriminatively Trained Part-Based Models PAMI 2010 32 1627 1645 10.1109/TPAMI.2009.167 20634557 · DOI · Paper page
  9. [74]Gonzalez A. Villalonga G. Xu J. Vazquez D. Amores J. Lopez A. Multiview Random Forest of Local Experts Combining RGB and LiDAR data for Pedestrian Detection Proceedings of the IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) Seoul, Korea 28 June–1 July 2015

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oh, S.-I., & Kang, H.-B.
Affiliations
Catholic University of Korea (KR)
Corresponding author
Kang, Hang-Bong
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2017-01-22
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
207
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2580683366
Cited by
120
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 3
FWCI
8.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Agency of Defense Development (UD150016ID)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Vision and Imaging
Keywords
object detection, object classification, decision fusion, intelligent vehicle systems, LiDAR, 3D point clouds, multi-sensor fusion, object proposal generation, semantic segmentation, KITTI dataset

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