REVIEW 2 cited by
Pedestrian Intention Prediction: A Multi-task Perspective
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
In order to be globally deployed, autonomous cars must guarantee the safety of pedestrians. This is the reason why forecasting pedestrians' intentions sufficiently in advance is one of the most critical and challenging tasks for autonomous vehicles. This work tries to solve this problem by jointly predicting the intention and visual states of pedestrians. In terms of visual states, whereas previous work focused on x-y coordinates, we will also predict the size and indeed the whole bounding box of the pedestrian. The method is a recurrent neural network in a multi-task learning approach. It has one head that predicts the intention of the pedestrian for each one of its future position and another one predicting the visual states of the pedestrian. Experiments on the JAAD dataset show the superiority of the performance of our method compared to previous works for intention prediction. Also, although its simple architecture (more than 2 times faster), the performance of the bounding box prediction is comparable to the ones yielded by much more complex architectures. Our code is available online.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Social-Pose: Enhancing Trajectory Prediction with Human Body Pose
An attention-based pose encoder improves trajectory prediction across LSTM, GAN, MLP, and Transformer models on several datasets, though a capacity confound weakens the attribution.
-
Can Reasons Help Improve Pedestrian Intent Estimation? A Cross-Modal Approach
Reason-enriched annotations and a cross-modal vision-language model improve pedestrian crossing-intent prediction over prior methods.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.