The DOI matches its DataCite record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bayesian Prediction of Future Street Scenes through Importance Sampling based Optimization
Open accessAbstract
For autonomous agents to successfully operate in the real world, anticipation of future events and states of their environment is a key competence. This problem can be formalized as a sequence prediction problem, where a number of observations are used to predict the sequence into the future. However, real-world scenarios demand a model of uncertainty of such predictions, as future states become increasingly uncertain and multi-modal -- in particular on long time horizons. This makes modelling and learning challenging. We cast state of the art semantic segmentation and future prediction models based on deep learning into a Bayesian formulation that in turn allows for a full Bayesian treatment of the prediction problem. We present a new sampling scheme for this model that draws from the success of variational autoencoders by incorporating a recognition network. In the experiments we show that our model outperforms prior work in accuracy of the predicted segmentation and provides calibrated probabilities that also better capture the multi-modal aspects of possible future states of street scenes.
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?
Most deep learning methods have not been employed in extremely automated disease monitoring systems due to lack of reliability of the model.
“Although DL methods have achieved outstanding performances in medical image analysis, most of them have not been employed in extremely automated disease monitoring systems due to lack of reliability of the model [503].”
From A review of uncertainty quantification in deep learning: Techniques, applications and challenges (2021) · cites this paper as [503]
Citations
Cites
Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition
He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., & Sun, J. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.90 · Cited by 235,474
Dropout as a bayesian approximation: Representing model uncertainty in deep learning
Gal, Y., & Ghahramani, Z. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.02142 · Cited by 6,471
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A review of uncertainty quantification in deep learning: Techniques, applications and challenges
Abdar, M., Pourpanah, F., Hussain, S., Rezazadegan, D., Liu, L., Ghavamzadeh, M., Fieguth, P., Cao, X., Khosravi, A., Acharya, U. R., et al. (2021) · Information Fusion · doi:10.1016/j.inffus.2021.05.008 · Cited by 3,111
Metadata
- Authors
- Bhattacharyya, A., Fritz, M., & Schiele, B.
- Affiliations
- Max Planck Society (DE)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2018
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1806.06939
- OpenAlex
- W2808953874
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- 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
- street scenes, Bayesian forecasting, importance sampling, variational autoencoder, semantic segmentation, autonomous driving, uncertainty calibration, multimodal prediction, sequence prediction
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