Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

A Survey and Tutorial of Redundancy Mitigation for Vehicular Cooperative Perception: Standards, Strategies and Open Issues

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This survey proposes a three-category taxonomy—object inclusion filtering, data format optimisation, and frequency management—to organise the fragmented literature on redundancy mitigation for vehicular cooperative perception.

desk verdict A genuinely useful survey of ETSI's redundancy mitigation evolution, but the three-way taxonomy is applied loosely enough that the central 'clear framework' claim needs tightening. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01200 v2 pith:ATIY7OAZ submitted 2025-01-02 cs.NI

Tengfei Lyu , Md Noor-A-Rahim , Dirk Pesch , Aisling O'Driscoll This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.NI
keywords CollectivePerceptionServiceredundancymitigationValueofInformationETSICPMvehicularnetworkscooperativesurveytaxonomy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This survey argues that the field of redundancy mitigation for the vehicular Collective Perception Service (CPS) is fragmented and needs a common structure. It proposes a taxonomy that divides all mitigation approaches into three classes: object inclusion filtering (which objects to report), data format optimisation (how many bytes per object), and frequency management (how often to send). The paper also traces the evolution of the European standards from the 2019 rules to the 2023 Value of Information (VoI) based specification, and it claims that none of the newly specified VoI measures have been evaluated in the literature. A sympathetic reader would take the paper's aim as giving researchers a shared map for comparing existing schemes and positioning future work.

What carries the argument

The machinery that carries the argument is the taxonomy itself, together with the VoI concept it organises. A Value of Information (VoI) measure scores each detected object by how much new, useful knowledge transmitting it would give other stations; eight such measures are specified in the 2023 standard. The taxonomy groups mitigation schemes by which resource they conserve: object inclusion filtering removes entire objects from the message, data format optimisation shrinks the data per object, and frequency management sends fewer messages overall. The paper uses this structure to position every surveyed method and to expose what has not been evaluated.

What would settle it

Locate any peer-reviewed evaluation of the angle-based VoI, classification-confidence-based VoI, or VoI-based frequency/content management measures from ETSI TS 103 324; if such an evaluation exists, the paper's statement that none of the newly specified VoI-based measures have been evaluated in the literature is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that every redundancy mitigation strategy for CPS can be understood as acting on one of three levers: deciding which detected objects deserve a slot in a Collective Perception Message, reducing the amount of data carried about each included object, or lowering the rate at which messages are generated. On this taxonomy, the standards themselves line up naturally: the ETSI VoI-based inclusion rules belong to object inclusion filtering, the VoI-based frequency and content management belongs to frequency management, and Multi-Channel Operation is acknowledged as an outlier that prioritises channel resources rather than reducing redundancy. The paper further claims that the 2023 standard extended the 2019 rules with two new VoI measures (angle-based and classification confidence-based), combined measures, and a frequency/content management proposal, and that none of the newly specified VoI-based measures have been evaluated in the literature.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's claim that none of the newly specified VoI-based measures have been evaluated depends on an undocumented and unverifiable literature search; a single published evaluation of one of those measures would weaken the paper's central justification for those open problems.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Researchers can use the taxonomy to position a new mitigation scheme quickly and to compare it against methods from the same category.
  • The open problems section becomes a roadmap: combined VoI methods, adaptive thresholds, and MCO-based prioritisation are identified as untested and under-specified.
  • If the taxonomy is complete, the field's fragmentation is a matter of vocabulary rather than substance, and the three categories could become a common language for standards and academic work alike.
  • The paper's claim that the new VoI measures are unevaluated, if true, means early evaluation studies of those measures would have clear novelty.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves implicit that its taxonomy is a claim about completeness; a hybrid scheme that simultaneously filters objects and compresses data would need a principled place, and the paper's own example of Multi-Channel Operation shows a fourth category may be needed for resource-prioritisation approaches.
  • The strongest test of the taxonomy is whether it predicts new work: if the taxonomy is sound, future methods should naturally map onto one category, and proposals that straddle categories should reveal themselves as integration challenges.
  • Its undocumented 'not evaluated' claim could be checked by an independent literature review, which would either confirm the gap or force a revision of the open-problems section.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript surveys and compares redundancy mitigation mechanisms for the ETSI Collective Perception Service, contrasting the 2019 ETSI TR 103 562 rules with the 2023 ETSI TS 103 324 Value-of-Information-based measures. It reviews literature quantifying the communication burden of CPMs, evaluates studies of the ETSI redundancy rules, and proposes a three-category taxonomy of academic mitigation approaches: object inclusion filtering, data format optimisation, and frequency management. The paper also discusses simulation environments for CPS evaluation and closes with open research issues such as adaptive threshold tuning, multi-channel operation, semantic communication, and the interaction between redundancy mitigation and security, mapping, and trust.

Significance. If the taxonomy and the survey's organization are made internally consistent, this will be a useful reference for researchers entering the CPS redundancy-mitigation area. The paper's strengths include a detailed side-by-side account of ETSI TR 103 562 vs TS 103 324, a clear summary of the eight VoI methods in Table II, a broad and current citation base, and an unusually thoughtful open-issues section covering cybersecurity, LDM/BEV, belief/certainty, and semantic communication. No derivations or code are expected for a survey, and the paper does not overclaim original technical results. However, the central taxonomic claim needs tightening, and the strong assertion that none of the new VoI measures have been evaluated needs either a documented search procedure or a more carefully qualified formulation.

major comments (3)
  1. [IV; Fig. 9; II-E; IV-A6; IV-D] The paper's central claim that the proposed three-part taxonomy "provides a clear framework for understanding and extending the state of the art" is not fully supported, because the categories are not applied consistently. Section II-E describes ETSI's Frequency and Content Management as jointly selecting both the CPM generation interval and the number of perceived objects/regions to include, yet Fig. 9 places it only under Frequency Management, ignoring its content-inclusion component. Where2comm is grouped under Object Inclusion Filtering in Fig. 9, while Section IV-A6 describes it as transmitting "a spatially sparse feature map" to reduce raw sensor data, which matches the paper's own Data Format Optimisation definition. Section IV also concedes that MCO "does not strictly fit the classification," and Section IV-D introduces an Infrastructure-Based Redundancy Mitigation Mechanism as a further category not shown in Fig. 9 or the three-part taxonomy. Because assignments appear to depend on editorial judgment beyond the stated definitions, the taxonomy as presented is neither clearly mutually exclusive nor clearly exhaustive. The authors should either revise the category definitions and assignments to align with the text, or explicitly present the taxonomy as a heuristic organizational device with admitted overlaps and residual categories.
  2. [I; III (opening); VI-B] The paper repeatedly states that none of the newly specified VoI-based measures have been evaluated in the literature, for example in the Introduction and in the opening paragraph of Section III, which says there have been "no studies investigating" the angle-based and classification-confidence-based VoI methods, VoI-based frequency and content management, or the use of MCO. No search methodology, databases, inclusion criteria, or cutoff date are provided, so this absolute negative claim is not verifiable. It is also internally weaker in Section VI-B, where the authors write that "existing research has not evaluated all eight VoI methods," which is a different statement. The authors should either document a systematic literature-search protocol that supports the stronger claim, or rephrase to "to the best of our knowledge" with a concrete description of the search scope. This matters because the open-problems section builds its motivation in part on the claimed absence of evaluations.
  3. [III-B; Fig. 7; Fig. 8] The parameter-sensitivity discussion for the Frequency-Based RMR refers to "Fig. 12" when illustrating the dependencies between N_Redundancy and W_Redundancy, but the relevant figure in the manuscript is Fig. 7; the Dynamics-Based discussion refers to Fig. 8. Since the surrounding analysis explicitly depends on these figures, the cross-reference should be corrected. In addition, Figs. 7 and 8 appear to be the authors' own qualitative summaries rather than results reproduced from Delooz et al.; if so, the text should say so explicitly, since the current wording could be read as reporting the original paper's conclusions.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Fig. 1] The figure caption contains a typo: "required fror" should be "required for".
  2. [Table I] The acronym table lists "MTU" and "RMR" twice; one duplicate of each should be removed.
  3. [IV-D] The first paragraph of Section IV-D contains a typo: "redundnacy mitigation" should be "redundancy mitigation".
  4. [IV-A6] The sentence "showing significant reductions in the message sizes transmitted between agents, expressed as a log scale" is unclear; please specify what is plotted on the logarithmic axis and which dataset or condition the 25.81% AP improvement refers to.
  5. [VI-B] The sentence "Authors in [27] are the only to date to have attempted..." should read "The authors in [27] are the only ones to date to have attempted...".
  6. [V] The claim that realistic sensors can only achieve 42% of the object detection rate of idealized sensors, attributed to [46], would benefit from a brief note on the scenario and sensing model used, since it is presented as a general quantitative finding.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a survey/tutorial with no derived predictions or fitted parameters, and its taxonomy is an editorial classification rather than a derivation that reduces to its own inputs.

full rationale

This manuscript is a survey and tutorial, not a quantitative derivation paper. It introduces no equations that are fitted to data, makes no predictive claims that are then shown to follow from their own construction, and does not reuse its own conclusions as premises. The central contribution is a proposed taxonomy (object inclusion filtering, data format optimisation, frequency management) used to organise a literature review. A taxonomy is an author-imposed classification scheme; applying it to the papers being surveyed is an interpretive act, not a circular derivation. Even where individual assignments are debatable (for example, Where2comm is placed under object inclusion filtering while its description emphasises transmitting a spatially sparse feature map, and the paper itself concedes that Multi-Channel Operation 'does not strictly fit the classification'), these are consistency or correctness concerns about the taxonomy, not cases where a claimed result is equivalent to its input by definition. The claim that 'none of the newly specified VoI-based measures have been evaluated in the literature' rests on an unverifiable literature search, but a completeness claim of this type is not circular reasoning; it is an evidentiary limitation. The authors do not cite their own prior work as load-bearing support, and no argument in the paper is forced by a self-citation chain. There are no fitted parameters renamed as predictions and no known result repackaged as a new derivation. Accordingly, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity, with a score of 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is a survey paper; it introduces no free parameters and no new physical or mathematical entities. The review rests on the assumed accuracy of the authors' summaries of ETSI standards and prior papers, and on the completeness of their literature search.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The authors' summaries of ETSI TR 103 562 and ETSI TS 103 324 accurately reflect the standards' content.
    The survey's core comparisons depend on a correct reading of the standards; the paper does not include machine-checked or independently verified extracts of the ETSI documents, so interpretation errors would propagate.
  • domain assumption The performance results reported for each surveyed method (e.g., CBR reduction, PDR, delay) are faithfully transcribed from the cited primary papers.
    The paper compiles quantitative claims from many references without re-running simulations, so transcription or context errors are possible.
  • domain assumption The literature search underlying the claim that no TS 103 324 VoI extensions have been evaluated is complete.
    This negative result is asserted multiple times without a search protocol, so if the search was incomplete, the main open-problem motivation would be weakened.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Survey and Tutorial of Redundancy Mitigation for Vehicular Cooperative Perception: Standards, Strategies and Open Issues." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ATIY7OAZ

@misc{pith2026250101200,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Survey and Tutorial of Redundancy Mitigation for Vehicular Cooperative Perception: Standards, Strategies and Open Issues},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ATIY7OAZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01200}
}
read the original abstract

This paper provides an in-depth review and discussion of the state of the art in redundancy mitigation for the vehicular Collective Perception Service (CPS). We focus on the evolutionary differences between the redundancy mitigation rules proposed in 2019 in ETSI TR 103 562 versus the 2023 technical specification ETSI TS 103 324, which uses a Value of Information (VoI) based mitigation approach. We also critically analyse the academic literature that has sought to quantify the communication challenges posed by the CPS and present a unique taxonomy of the redundancy mitigation approaches proposed using three distinct classifications: object inclusion filtering, data format optimisation, and frequency management. Finally, this paper identifies open research challenges that must be adequately investigated to satisfactorily deploy CPS redundancy mitigation measures. Our critical and comprehensive evaluation serves as a point of reference for those undertaking research in this area.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01200 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Timeline of the ETSI CPS standard and associated standards that inform proposed redundancy mitigation techniques. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Definition of the ETSI CPM packet structure according [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Visual representation of the data in (a) the CPM management container and (b-d) the originating vehicle container. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visual representation of the data captured by SIC, PRC, POC instances in the CPM container. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Summary of the CPM Generation Process including [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: ETSI proposed VoI based frequency and content [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Impact of N Redundancy and W Redundancy parame￾ters on the performance of the ETSI Frequency-Based method to effectively mitigate redundancy. the performance for N Redundancy = {1,3,5,10,15}. When a low threshold is set, e.g. N Redundancy = 1, the authors found that th…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Proposed Taxonomy of Redundancy Mitigation Techniques. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Schematic of Pre-filter [9] and Look-ahead [18] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Visualisation of redundancy mitigation taxonomy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Open Research Challenges in Enhancing Redundancy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SComCP: Task-Oriented Semantic Communication for Collaborative Perception

    eess.SP 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    SComCP combines importance-aware feature selection with a learned JSCC codec to improve collaborative 3D detection over noisy V2V channels, reporting gains at low SNR.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The potential of collective perception in vehicular ad-hoc networks,

    H.-j. Gunther, O. Trauer, and L. Wolf, “The potential of collective perception in vehicular ad-hoc networks,” in 2015 14th International Conference on ITS Telecommunications (ITST) . IEEE, 2015, pp. 1–5

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Collaborative perception—the missing piece in realizing fully autonomous driving,

    S. Malik, M. J. Khan, M. A. Khan, and H. El-Sayed, “Collaborative perception—the missing piece in realizing fully autonomous driving,” Sensors, vol. 23, no. 18, p. 7854, 2023

    2023

  3. [3]

    Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,

    I. ETSI, “Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,” Basic Set of Applications TS 103 324 V0.0.22 , 2019

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,

    ETSI ITS, “Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,” Basic Set of Applications TS 103 324 V2.1.1 , 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    V2X cooperative perception for autonomous driving: Recent advances and challenges,

    T. Huang, J. Liu, X. Zhou, D. C. Nguyen, M. R. Azghadi, Y . Xia, Q.-L. Han, and S. Sun, “V2X cooperative perception for autonomous driving: Recent advances and challenges,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03525 , 2023

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    A survey and framework of cooperative perception: From heterogeneous singleton to hierarchical cooperation,

    Z. Bai, G. Wu, M. J. Barth, Y . Liu, E. A. Sisbot, K. Oguchi, and Z. Huang, “A survey and framework of cooperative perception: From heterogeneous singleton to hierarchical cooperation,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Survey on cooperative perception in an automotive context,

    A. Caillot, S. Ouerghi, P. Vasseur, R. Boutteau, and Y . Dupuis, “Survey on cooperative perception in an automotive context,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 14 204–14 223, 2022

    2022

  8. [8]

    T. ETSI, “103 301 intelligent transport systems (its); vehicular commu- nications; basic set of applications; facilities layer protocols and com- munication requirements for infrastructure services v1. 3.1,” Technical Specification, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    Redundancy mitiga- tion in cooperative perception for connected and automated vehicles,

    G. Thandavarayan, J. Gozalvez, and M. Sepulcre, “Redundancy mitiga- tion in cooperative perception for connected and automated vehicles,” in 2020 IEEE 91st Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2020-Spring). IEEE, 2020, pp. 1–5

    2020

  2. [10]

    Intelligent transport systems (its); cooperative its (c-its); release 1,

    E. ITS, “Intelligent transport systems (its); cooperative its (c-its); release 1,” TR 101 607 V1.2.1 , 2020

    2020

  3. [11]

    Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,

    I. ETSI, “Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,” Vehicular Communications;Basic Set of Applications; TR 102 638, 2009

    2009

  4. [12]

    C2c-cc: Spectrum needs for safety related its ap- plications,

    C. . C. C. Consortium, “C2c-cc: Spectrum needs for safety related its ap- plications,” CAR 2 CAR Communication Consortium, Tech. Rep., 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.car-2-car.org/fileadmin/documents/ General Documents/C2CCC TR 2050 Spectrum Needs.pdf

    2024

  5. [13]

    Intelligent transport systems (its); facilities layer function; multi-channel operation (mco) for cooperative its (c-its); release 2,

    ETSI ITS, “Intelligent transport systems (its); facilities layer function; multi-channel operation (mco) for cooperative its (c-its); release 2,” Basic Set of Applications TS 103 141 V2.2.1 , 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,

    I. ETSI, “Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,” Multi-Channel Operation (MCO) for Cooperative ITS (C-ITS); Release 2 V2.2.1, 2022

    2022

  7. [15]

    Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,

    ——, “Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications,” Access layer specification in the 5 GHz frequency band;Multi-Channel Operation (MCO) for Cooperative ITS (C-ITS); Release 2 ; TS 103 695; V2.1.1, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Intelligent transport system (its);,

    ——, “Intelligent transport system (its);,” Multi-Channel Operation study; TS 103 697; Release 2 , 2021

    2021

  9. [17]

    Multi-channel operation for the release 2 of etsi cooperative intelligent transport systems,

    A. Bazzi, M. Sepulcre, Q. Delooz, A. Festag, J. V ogt, H. Wieker, F. Berens, and P. Spaanderman, “Multi-channel operation for the release 2 of etsi cooperative intelligent transport systems,” IEEE Communica- tions Standards Magazine , vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 28–35, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    Generation of co- operative perception messages for connected and automated vehicles,

    G. Thandavarayan, M. Sepulcre, and J. Gozalvez, “Generation of co- operative perception messages for connected and automated vehicles,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 69, no. 12, pp. 16 336– 16 341, 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    Dynamic dissemination method for collective perception,

    C. Allig and G. Wanielik, “Dynamic dissemination method for collective perception,” in 2019 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Confer- ence (ITSC). IEEE, 2019, pp. 3756–3762

    2019

  12. [20]

    A first study on the spectrum needs for release 2 V2X services,

    E. Xhoxhi and F. A. Schiegg, “A first study on the spectrum needs for release 2 V2X services,” in 2023 IEEE 98th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2023-Fall). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–6

    2023

  13. [21]

    Intelligent transport systems (its); decentralized congestion control mechanisms for intelligent transport systems operating in the 5 ghz range; access layer part,

    T. Etsi, “Intelligent transport systems (its); decentralized congestion control mechanisms for intelligent transport systems operating in the 5 ghz range; access layer part,” ETSI TS, vol. 102, no. 687, p. V1.2.1, 2019

    2019

  14. [22]

    Enhancing the safety of vulnerable road users: Messaging protocols for V2X communication,

    S. Lobo, A. Festag, and C. Facchi, “Enhancing the safety of vulnerable road users: Messaging protocols for V2X communication,” in2022 IEEE 96th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2022-Fall) . IEEE, 2022, pp. 1–7

    2022

  15. [23]

    A statistical character- ization of the actual cooperative perception messages and a generative model to reproduce them,

    M. Andreani, L. Lusvarghi, and M. L. Merani, “A statistical character- ization of the actual cooperative perception messages and a generative model to reproduce them,” in 2023 IEEE Future Networks World Forum (FNWF). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–7

    2023

  16. [24]

    nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving,

    H. Caesar, V . Bankiti, A. H. Lang, S. V ora, V . E. Liong, Q. Xu, A. Krishnan, Y . Pan, G. Baldan, and O. Beijbom, “nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2020, pp. 11 621–11 631

    2020

  17. [25]

    Cirrus: A long-range bi-pattern lidar dataset,

    Z. Wang, S. Ding, Y . Li, J. Fenn, S. Roychowdhury, A. Wallin, L. Martin, S. Ryvola, G. Sapiro, and Q. Qiu, “Cirrus: A long-range bi-pattern lidar dataset,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2021, pp. 5744–5750

    2021

  18. [26]

    Stc: Spatial and temporal clustering for cooperative perception system,

    B. Hakim, A. A. Elbery, M. Hefeida, W. S. Alasmary, K. H. Almotairi, and A. Noureldin, “Stc: Spatial and temporal clustering for cooperative perception system,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Value- anticipating V2V communications for cooperative perception,

    T. Higuchi, M. Giordani, A. Zanella, M. Zorzi, and O. Altintas, “Value- anticipating V2V communications for cooperative perception,” in 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). IEEE, 2019, pp. 1947–1952

    2019

  20. [28]

    Enhancing vehicular network efficiency: the impact of object data inclusion in the collective perception service,

    A. Figueiredo, P. Rito, M. Lu ´ıs, and S. Sargento, “Enhancing vehicular network efficiency: the impact of object data inclusion in the collective perception service,” IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Analysis and evaluation of information redundancy mitigation for V2X collective perception,

    Q. Delooz, A. Willecke, K. Garlichs, A.-C. Hagau, L. Wolf, A. Vinel, and A. Festag, “Analysis and evaluation of information redundancy mitigation for V2X collective perception,” IEEE Access , vol. 10, pp. 47 076–47 093, 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    Evaluation of redundancy mitigation rules in V2X networks for enhanced collective perception services,

    A. H. Sakr, “Evaluation of redundancy mitigation rules in V2X networks for enhanced collective perception services,” IEEE Access, 2024

    2024

  23. [31]

    A distance-based redundancy mitigation mechanism for collective perception in vehicular networks,

    A. Malik and A. H. Sakr, “A distance-based redundancy mitigation mechanism for collective perception in vehicular networks,” in 2024 IEEE Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE). IEEE, 2024, pp. 190–191

    2024

  24. [32]

    Scalable cooperative perception for connected and automated driving,

    G. Thandavarayan, M. Sepulcre, J. Gozalvez, and B. Coll-Perales, “Scalable cooperative perception for connected and automated driving,” Journal of Network and Computer Applications , vol. 216, p. 103655, 2023

    2023

  25. [33]

    Context-aware content selection and message generation for collective perception services,

    A. Chtourou, P. Merdrignac, and O. Shagdar, “Context-aware content selection and message generation for collective perception services,” Electronics, vol. 10, no. 20, p. 2509, 2021

    2021

  26. [34]

    Feature- based vehicle identification framework for optimization of collective perception messages in vehicular networks,

    H. Masuda, O. El Marai, M. Tsukada, T. Taleb, and H. Esaki, “Feature- based vehicle identification framework for optimization of collective perception messages in vehicular networks,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 2120–2129, 2022

    2022

  27. [35]

    Collision- aware clustering for enhanced cooperative perception in V2V systems,

    B. Hakim, A. A. Elbery, M. S. Hefeida, and A. Noureldin, “Collision- aware clustering for enhanced cooperative perception in V2V systems,” in GLOBECOM 2023-2023 IEEE Global Communications Conference . IEEE, 2023, pp. 1048–1053

    2023

  28. [36]

    Re- dundancy mitigation mechanism for collective perception in connected and autonomous vehicles,

    W. Lobato, P. Mendes, D. Ros ´ario, E. Cerqueira, and L. A. Villas, “Re- dundancy mitigation mechanism for collective perception in connected and autonomous vehicles,” Future Internet, vol. 15, no. 2, p. 41, 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Cooperverse: A mobile-edge-cloud framework for universal cooperative perception with mixed connectivity and automation,

    Z. Bai, G. Wu, M. J. Barth, Y . Liu, E. A. Sisbot, and K. Oguchi, “Cooperverse: A mobile-edge-cloud framework for universal cooperative perception with mixed connectivity and automation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.03128, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Aicp: Augmented informative cooperative perception,

    P. Zhou, P. Kortoc ¸i, Y .-P. Yau, B. Finley, X. Wang, T. Braud, L.- H. Lee, S. Tarkoma, J. Kangasharju, and P. Hui, “Aicp: Augmented informative cooperative perception,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 22 505–22 518, 2022

    2022

  31. [39]

    Relayed collective perception service with redundancy mitigation and time synchronization for V2X communications networks,

    Y .-K. Huang, P. Chennakesavula, and J.-M. Wu, “Relayed collective perception service with redundancy mitigation and time synchronization for V2X communications networks,” in 2023 IEEE 97th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2023-Spring). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

    2023

  32. [40]

    Data redundancy mitigation in V2X based collective perceptions,

    H. Huang, H. Li, C. Shao, T. Sun, W. Fang, and S. Dang, “Data redundancy mitigation in V2X based collective perceptions,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 13 405–13 418, 2020

    2020

  33. [41]

    Where2comm: Communication-efficient collaborative perception via spatial confidence maps,

    Y . Hu, S. Fang, Z. Lei, Y . Zhong, and S. Chen, “Where2comm: Communication-efficient collaborative perception via spatial confidence maps,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 35, pp. 4874–4886, 2022

    2022

  34. [42]

    Coopernaut: End-to- end driving with cooperative perception for networked vehicles,

    J. Cui, H. Qiu, D. Chen, P. Stone, and Y . Zhu, “Coopernaut: End-to- end driving with cooperative perception for networked vehicles,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 17 252–17 262

    2022

  35. [43]

    V2V cooperative sensing using reinforcement learning with action branch- ing,

    M. K. Abdel-Aziz, C. Perlecto, S. Samarakoon, and M. Bennis, “V2V cooperative sensing using reinforcement learning with action branch- ing,” in ICC 2021-IEEE International Conference on Communications . IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–6. 25

    2021

  36. [44]

    Keypoints-based deep feature fusion for cooperative vehicle detection of autonomous driving,

    Y . Yuan, H. Cheng, and M. Sester, “Keypoints-based deep feature fusion for cooperative vehicle detection of autonomous driving,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 3054–3061, 2022

    2022

  37. [45]

    A voi based redundant mitigation strategy in cooperative perception services of cavs,

    Z. Shen, L. Zhu, W. Qin, Y . Zhi, and C. Li, “A voi based redundant mitigation strategy in cooperative perception services of cavs,” in 2024 IEEE/CIC International Conference on Communications in China (ICCC). IEEE, 2024, pp. 985–990

    2024

  38. [46]

    A study on collective perception with realistic perception mod- eling,

    S. Li, “A study on collective perception with realistic perception mod- eling,” in 2023 IEEE 98th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2023- Fall). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–6

    2023

  39. [47]

    When2com: Multi-agent perception via communication graph grouping,

    Y .-C. Liu, J. Tian, N. Glaser, and Z. Kira, “When2com: Multi-agent perception via communication graph grouping,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , 2020, pp. 4106–4115

    2020

  40. [48]

    Generating evidential bev maps in continuous driving space,

    Y . Yuan, H. Cheng, M. Y . Yang, and M. Sester, “Generating evidential bev maps in continuous driving space,” ISPRS Journal of Photogram- metry and Remote Sensing , vol. 204, pp. 27–41, 2023

    2023

  41. [49]

    A distributed double deep q-learning method for object redundancy mitigation in vehicular networks,

    I. Ghnaya, H. Aniss, T. Ahmed, and M. Mosbah, “A distributed double deep q-learning method for object redundancy mitigation in vehicular networks,” in 2023 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC). IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–6

    2023

  42. [50]

    Cooper- ative perception: Mitigating messages content duplication,

    B. S. Chawky, M. S. Hefeida, A. A. Elbery, and A. Noureldin, “Cooper- ative perception: Mitigating messages content duplication,” in 2022 5th International Conference on Communications, Signal Processing, and their Applications (ICCSPA). IEEE, 2022, pp. 1–6

    2022

  43. [51]

    Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications; basic set of applications; analysis of the collective-perception service (cps),

    I. ETSI, “Intelligent transport system (its); vehicular communications; basic set of applications; analysis of the collective-perception service (cps),” Draft TR 103 562 V0. 0.15 , 2019

    2019

  44. [52]

    Artery: Extending veins for vanet applications,

    R. Riebl, H.-J. G ¨unther, C. Facchi, and L. Wolf, “Artery: Extending veins for vanet applications,” in 2015 International Conference on Models and Technologies for Intelligent Transportation Systems (MT-ITS) . IEEE, 2015, pp. 450–456

    2015

  45. [53]

    Traffic simulation with sumo–simulation of urban mobility,

    D. Krajzewicz, “Traffic simulation with sumo–simulation of urban mobility,” Fundamentals of traffic simulation , pp. 269–293, 2010

    2010

  46. [54]

    Autocast: Scalable infrastructure-less cooperative perception for distributed collaborative driving,

    H. Qiu, P. Huang, N. Asavisanu, X. Liu, K. Psounis, and R. Govin- dan, “Autocast: Scalable infrastructure-less cooperative perception for distributed collaborative driving,” in Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Service...

    2022

  47. [55]

    Svga-net: Sparse voxel- graph attention network for 3d object detection from point clouds,

    Q. He, Z. Wang, H. Zeng, Y . Zeng, and Y . Liu, “Svga-net: Sparse voxel- graph attention network for 3d object detection from point clouds,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , vol. 36, no. 1, 2022, pp. 870–878

    2022

  48. [56]

    Optimizing cooperative perception message dissemination in vehicular networks through selective transmission,

    R. Singh, S. Kumar et al., “Optimizing cooperative perception message dissemination in vehicular networks through selective transmission,” in 2024 16th International Conference on COMmunication Systems & NETworkS (COMSNETS). IEEE, 2024, pp. 506–514

    2024

  49. [57]

    Opencda: an open cooperative driving automation framework integrated with co-simulation,

    R. Xu, Y . Guo, X. Han, X. Xia, H. Xiang, and J. Ma, “Opencda: an open cooperative driving automation framework integrated with co-simulation,” in 2021 IEEE International Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC) . IEEE, 2021, pp. 1155–1162

    2021

  50. [58]

    Network simulations with the ns-3 simulator,

    T. R. Henderson, M. Lacage, G. F. Riley, C. Dowell, and J. Kopena, “Network simulations with the ns-3 simulator,” SIGCOMM demonstra- tion, vol. 14, no. 14, p. 527, 2008

    2008

  51. [59]

    Omnet++,

    A. Varga, “Omnet++,” in Modeling and tools for network simulation . Springer, 2010, pp. 35–59

    2010

  52. [60]

    Carla: An open urban driving simulator,

    A. Dosovitskiy, G. Ros, F. Codevilla, A. Lopez, and V . Koltun, “Carla: An open urban driving simulator,” in Conference on robot learning . PMLR, 2017, pp. 1–16

    2017

  53. [61]

    Veins: The open source vehicular network simulation framework,

    C. Sommer, D. Eckhoff, A. Brummer, D. S. Buse, F. Hagenauer, S. Joerer, and M. Segata, “Veins: The open source vehicular network simulation framework,” Recent advances in network simulation: the OMNeT++ environment and its ecosystem , pp. 215–252, 2019

    2019

  54. [62]

    V2X misbehavior and collective perception service: Considerations for standardization,

    M. R. Ansari, J.-P. Monteuuis, J. Petit, and C. Chen, “V2X misbehavior and collective perception service: Considerations for standardization,” in 2021 IEEE Conference on Standards for Communications and Net- working (CSCN). IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–6

    2021

  55. [63]

    Augmented perception by v2x cooperation (pac-v2x): Security issues and misbehavior detection solutions,

    M. Hadded, O. Shagdar, and P. Merdrignac, “Augmented perception by v2x cooperation (pac-v2x): Security issues and misbehavior detection solutions,” in 2019 15th International Wireless Communications & Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC) . IEEE, 2019, pp. 907–912

    2019

  56. [64]

    Design of a misbehavior detection system for objects based shared perception v2x applications,

    M. Ambrosin, L. L. Yang, X. Liu, M. R. Sastry, and I. J. Alvarez, “Design of a misbehavior detection system for objects based shared perception v2x applications,” in 2019 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC) . IEEE, 2019, pp. 1165–1172

    2019

  57. [65]

    Security attacks impact for collective perception based roadside assistance: A study of a highway on-ramp merging case,

    M. Hadded, P. Merdrignac, S. Duhamel, and O. Shagdar, “Security attacks impact for collective perception based roadside assistance: A study of a highway on-ramp merging case,” in 2020 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC) . IEEE, 2020, pp. 1284–1289

    2020

  58. [66]

    Distributed misbehavior detection based on vehicle perception model and cpm data collection,

    M. S. Ali and P. Merdrignac, “Distributed misbehavior detection based on vehicle perception model and cpm data collection,” in 2023 IEEE 98th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2023-Fall) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

    2023

  59. [67]

    Implementation of kalman filtering and multi-sensor fusion data for autonomous driving

    P. Veysi, M. Adeli, and N. Peirov Naziri, “Implementation of kalman filtering and multi-sensor fusion data for autonomous driving.”

  60. [68]

    Multi-layered local dynamic map for a connected and automated in-vehicle system,

    S. Taddei, F. Visintainer, F. Stoffella, and F. Biral, “Multi-layered local dynamic map for a connected and automated in-vehicle system,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 3, p. 1306, 2024

    2024

  61. [69]

    Intelligent transport systems (its);,

    I. ETSI, “Intelligent transport systems (its);,” Communication Architec- ture for Multi-Channel Operation (MCO); TS 103 696; Release 2 , 2021

    2021

  62. [70]

    Release 14 Description; Summary of Rel14 Work Items,

    3GPP, “Release 14 Description; Summary of Rel14 Work Items,” 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical Report TR 21.914, 2017, release 14

    2017

  63. [71]

    Enhancement of 3GPP Support for V2X Scenarios,

    ——, “Enhancement of 3GPP Support for V2X Scenarios,” 3rd Gen- eration Partnership Project (3GPP), Technical Specification TS 22.186, 2018, release 15

    2018

  64. [72]

    Semantic communications for future internet: Fundamentals, applications, and challenges,

    W. Yang, H. Du, Z. Q. Liew, W. Y . B. Lim, Z. Xiong, D. Niyato, X. Chi, X. Shen, and C. Miao, “Semantic communications for future internet: Fundamentals, applications, and challenges,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 213–250, 2022

    2022

  65. [73]

    Swisscheese: Fine- grained channel-spatial feature filtering for communication-efficient co- operative perception,

    Q. Xie, X. Zhou, T. Hong, T. Qiu, and W. Qu, “Swisscheese: Fine- grained channel-spatial feature filtering for communication-efficient co- operative perception,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2024

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.