Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 33 references

Multi-Stage Knowledge-Distilled VGAE and GAT for Robust Controller-Area-Network Intrusion Detection

T0 review · 4 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a VGAE-guided undersampling pipeline plus a knowledge-distilled GAT yields a CAN intrusion detector with 96% fewer parameters than its teacher while improving average F1 by 16.2% over existing methods.

desk verdict The submitted full text is a different paper entirely, so the CAN IDS abstract's quantitative claims are unverifiable; send it back for the correct manuscript before any review. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.04845 v1 pith:QJYBVFCV submitted 2025-08-06 cs.LG cs.AI

Robert Frenken , Sidra Ghayour Bhatti , Hanqin Zhang , Qadeer Ahmed This is my paper
classification cs.LGcs.AI
keywords CANbussecurityintrusiondetectionvariationalgraphautoencoderattentionnetworkknowledgedistillationclassimbalanceunsupervisedanomalyin-vehiclenetworks
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

The paper tries to establish that an in-vehicle network intrusion detector can be both much smaller and more accurate than current published methods if it combines two stages: a Variational Graph Autoencoder (VGAE) that scores CAN bus traffic for anomalies and selectively undersamples the majority normal class, and a Graph Attention Network (GAT) classifier that is knowledge-distilled into a compact student model. CAN traffic is encoded as graph sequences so the model can exploit temporal and relational structure rather than reading frames in isolation. On six public CAN datasets, the authors report that the student GAT retains strong performance while cutting parameters by 96%, and that the full pipeline improves average F1 by 16.2% over existing methods, with gains up to 55% on highly imbalanced sets. The reason to care is practical: cars need intrusion detection that runs on limited hardware and still catches rare attacks.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are (1) the VGAE, whose reconstruction error on graph-encoded CAN sequences acts as a label-free anomaly score and determines which majority-class samples are undersampled; (2) the Graph Attention Network, which classifies attack types from the graph-sequence representation; and (3) knowledge distillation, which transfers the teacher GAT's decision surface into a student GAT with 96% fewer parameters. Optional score-level fusion combines the anomaly score with the classifier output.

What would settle it

Using identical splits and metrics, replace the VGAE undersampling with random undersampling at the same retained-sample rate and rerun on the six datasets; if average F1 does not drop meaningfully, the anomaly selector is not the cause of the reported gains. Also compare the student GAT against the teacher GAT on the same test sets, since the 96% parameter-reduction claim is only meaningful if the student stays within a stated performance margin of the teacher.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that class imbalance in CAN intrusion data can be handled without label-hungry resampling by using VGAE reconstruction error as a structural anomaly signal: normal samples whose reconstruction is least anomalous are discarded, shrinking the majority class before the supervised GAT is trained. Knowledge distillation then compresses the GAT teacher into a student with 96% fewer parameters. The paper reports that on Car-Hacking, Car-Survival, and can-train-and-test datasets, this combination is competitive in accuracy and efficient in compute, with average F1 improvements of 16.2% over existing methods and up to 55% on imbalanced benchmarks.

Load-bearing premise

The method works only if the autoencoder's anomaly score tells which normal samples can be thrown away without losing the traffic needed to detect attacks.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the reported numbers hold, an onboard CAN intrusion detector can run at 4% of the teacher's parameter count, making real-time deployment on automotive electronic control units more plausible.
  • Rare attack classes, which drive the F1 improvements (up to 55% on imbalanced datasets), become practically detectable instead of being washed out by normal traffic.
  • The VGAE's reconstruction score can serve as an unsupervised early-warning signal before the supervised GAT is retrained on new attack types.
  • The graph-sequence encoding provides a template for applying graph neural networks to other protocol-level bus traffic beyond CAN.
  • The 16.2% average F1 gain, if replicated, would reset the bar for published CAN intrusion detection baselines.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the VGAE selector is label-free, the same undersampling recipe could transfer to other imbalanced graph-classification problems, such as fraud detection or network intrusion in non-automotive protocols, but only if reconstruction error ranks the rare class as anomalous in that domain.
  • A direct test of whether the anomaly score is doing real work: replace VGAE-based undersampling with random undersampling at the same retained-sample rate while keeping the same classifier; if the F1 gain collapses, the selector is causal.
  • Transparency note: the full-text manuscript supplied with this record is an unrelated paper on 3D human motion prediction; the summary above follows the paper's stated title and abstract only.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript as submitted pairs an abstract for arXiv:2508.04845, titled "Multi-Stage Knowledge-Distilled VGAE and GAT for Robust Controller-Area-Network Intrusion Detection," with a full text that is an entirely different paper, arXiv:2508.04847, "LuKAN: A Kolmogorov-Arnold Network Framework for 3D Human Motion Prediction" by Hasan et al. The abstract claims a multi-stage CAN intrusion detection pipeline: VGAE-based selective undersampling, knowledge-distilled GAT classification, a 96% parameter reduction, average 16.2% F1 improvements over existing methods, up to 55% F1 gains on imbalanced datasets, and evaluation on six public CAN datasets. None of this content appears in the supplied full text. There are no equations for the VGAE, no distillation procedure, no GAT architecture, no dataset splits, no baseline table, no F1 results, no parameter counts, and no code or data artifacts for the CAN intrusion detection work. Consequently, every quantitative claim in the abstract is unsupported by the manuscript body provided for review.

Significance. If the claimed results held, the work could be a meaningful contribution to automotive CAN intrusion detection: a compact graph-attention classifier with a 96% parameter reduction that improves F1 by 16.2% on average and by up to 55% on highly imbalanced attack classes would be practically valuable. However, none of the ingredients needed to substantiate those claims are present. There are no machine-checked proofs, no reproducible code, no parameter-free derivations, and no falsifiable per-dataset predictions in the submitted material. The full text is a different paper about 3D human motion prediction. Therefore the significance cannot be assessed beyond the abstract's assertions; the manuscript in its current form provides no evidence for its central claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [Full Text (all sections)] The complete body text is the unrelated LuKAN paper (arXiv:2508.04847) on 3D human motion prediction. It contains no VGAE, no knowledge distillation, no graph attention network for CAN traffic, no CAN datasets, and no intrusion detection experiments. This is not a missing appendix or a presentation issue; the object of review is absent. All architecture and experimental claims from the abstract cannot be checked because the corresponding manuscript is not supplied.
  2. [Abstract: 96% parameter reduction] The abstract states the compact student GAT achieves 96% parameter reduction compared to the teacher model, but no parameter counts, teacher architecture, student architecture, or distillation configuration (temperature, loss weights, distillation schedule) appear anywhere in the provided text. The claim is therefore unverifiable and, as written, unfalsifiable.
  3. [Abstract: VGAE-based selective undersampling] The central data-processing premise is that VGAE reconstruction-error scores can select which normal samples to discard before GAT training. The manuscript gives no equation for the anomaly score, no threshold or undersampling ratio, no ablation comparing selective undersampling with random undersampling or other imbalance heuristics, and no statement that the selection threshold was chosen using only training labels. Without these details, the reported F1 gains cannot be separated from possible test-label leakage or selection artifacts.
  4. [Abstract: experimental comparison] The abstract reports an average F1 improvement of 16.2% over existing methods and up to 55% on imbalanced datasets, evaluated on six public CAN datasets, but names only three (Car-Hacking, Car-Survival, can-train-and-test). No per-dataset table, baseline identities, metric definitions (e.g., macro vs. micro F1), dataset splits, or error bars are supplied. The claimed improvement cannot be reproduced or audited without this information.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Header and metadata] The running header, authors, and section numbering all belong to the LuKAN paper, not to the CAN intrusion detection paper announced in the abstract. This mismatch should be caught by the editorial office.
  2. [Abstract: dataset list] The abstract says 'six public CAN intrusion datasets' but lists only three names. The remaining three datasets, if they exist, are not identified.
  3. [References in supplied full text] The supplied reference list is for the LuKAN paper, including a typo in [26] ('Maching Learning'). These references are irrelevant to the CAN intrusion detection claims and should be removed when the correct manuscript is supplied.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity can be established: the supplied full text (LuKAN) is a different paper from the abstract under review (CAN IDS VGAE/KD-GAT), so there is no derivation chain to audit.

full rationale

The manuscript supplied as full text is arXiv:2508.04847 ('LuKAN: A Kolmogorov-Arnold Network Framework for 3D Human Motion Prediction') by Hasan et al., whereas the abstract to be reviewed (arXiv:2508.04845) describes a multi-stage CAN intrusion-detection framework combining a VGAE, knowledge-distilled GAT, selective undersampling, and evaluations on Car-Hacking, Car-Survival, and can-train-and-test. None of the equations, architecture definitions, dataset splits, baseline protocols, or F1 tables needed to audit the claimed derivation appear in the provided material. Because there is no derivational chain, no prediction can be exhibited as equivalent to its inputs by construction, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no self-citation is load-bearing. The mismatch is a serious provenance/completeness problem that should be weighed as a correctness or reproducibility risk, not as circularity. Under the rule that circularity requires quoting the paper and exhibiting a specific reduction, the honest finding is no detectable circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on at least four hidden hyperparameter choices (undersampling ratio, distillation configuration, graph construction, architecture sizes) and three domain assumptions about the graph encoding, the VGAE selection safety, and the fairness of the comparison protocol. No equations are available to audit, because the submitted body is a different paper. The pipeline introduces no new physical or conceptual entity; VGAE, GAT, and knowledge distillation are established model classes, so the innovation, if any, is compositional rather than a new entity.

free parameters (4)
  • VGAE selective undersampling ratio or anomaly-score threshold
    The abstract says the pipeline applies 'VGAE-based selective undersampling to address class imbalance'; the fraction of normal samples removed is a hand-set hyperparameter that directly controls class balance and therefore measured F1.
  • Knowledge distillation configuration (temperature and loss weights)
    The abstract reports a 96% parameter reduction from teacher to student GAT but gives no distillation objective details; the balance between task loss and distillation loss is a free choice affecting the accuracy/efficiency trade-off.
  • Graph sequence construction (window size and edge criterion)
    The abstract states CAN activity is 'encoded as graph sequences to model temporal and relational dependencies' but does not specify how nodes, edges, or windows are built; this choice determines what information the VGAE and GAT can see.
  • VGAE latent dimension and GAT architecture widths
    Model sizes are not given; the claimed parameter reduction is relative to an unnamed teacher, so absolute capacities are unstated free design choices.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption CAN bus traffic can be encoded as graph sequences without losing the signal needed to separate attacks from normal traffic.
    Abstract: 'CAN bus activity is encoded as graph sequences to model temporal and relational dependencies.' If the graph abstraction drops or blurs attack-relevant patterns, both the VGAE selection and GAT classification fail regardless of training quality.
  • domain assumption VGAE reconstruction error ranks samples by how informative they are for downstream classification, and the selection uses no test-set information.
    The pipeline's class-imbalance fix, 'VGAE-based selective undersampling', presupposes the anomaly score picks discardable samples safely; label leakage or a weak score would invalidate the reported F1 gains. This is the weakest load-bearing premise of the method.
  • domain assumption The six claimed public datasets share consistent labels and are evaluated under the same splits and metrics as the 'existing methods' being compared.
    The headline '16.2% average F1 improvement over existing methods' is only interpretable if the comparison protocol matches; the abstract names only three of six datasets and no baseline list, so this premise is unverifiable from the submitted document.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multi-Stage Knowledge-Distilled VGAE and GAT for Robust Controller-Area-Network Intrusion Detection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QJYBVFCV

@misc{pith2026250804845,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multi-Stage Knowledge-Distilled VGAE and GAT for Robust Controller-Area-Network Intrusion Detection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QJYBVFCV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.04845}
}
read the original abstract

The Controller Area Network (CAN) protocol is a standard for in-vehicle communication but remains susceptible to cyber-attacks due to its lack of built-in security. This paper presents a multi-stage intrusion detection framework leveraging unsupervised anomaly detection and supervised graph learning tailored for automotive CAN traffic. Our architecture combines a Variational Graph Autoencoder (VGAE) for structural anomaly detection with a Knowledge-Distilled Graph Attention Network (KD-GAT) for robust attack classification. CAN bus activity is encoded as graph sequences to model temporal and relational dependencies. The pipeline applies VGAE-based selective undersampling to address class imbalance, followed by GAT classification with optional score-level fusion. The compact student GAT achieves 96% parameter reduction compared to the teacher model while maintaining strong predictive performance. Experiments on six public CAN intrusion datasets--Car-Hacking, Car-Survival, and can-train-and-test--demonstrate competitive accuracy and efficiency, with average improvements of 16.2% in F1-score over existing methods, particularly excelling on highly imbalanced datasets with up to 55% F1-score improvements.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A spatio-temporal transformer for 3D human motion prediction

    Emre Aksan, Manuel Kaufmann, Peng Cao, and Otmar Hilliges. A spatio-temporal transformer for 3D human motion prediction. In Proc. International Conference on 3D Vision, pages 565–574, 2021

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Make- An-Animation: Large-scale text-conditional 3D human motion generation

    Samaneh Azadi, Akbar Shah, Thomas Hayes, Devi Parikh, and Sonal Gupta. Make- An-Animation: Large-scale text-conditional 3D human motion generation. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 15039–15048, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    MotionMixer: MLP-based 3D human body pose forecasting

    Arij Bouazizi, Adrian Holzbock, Ulrich Kressel, Klaus Dietmayer, and Vasileios Bela- giannis. MotionMixer: MLP-based 3D human body pose forecasting. In Proc. Inter- national Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 791–798, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    On a constructive proof of Kolmogorov’s superpo- sition theorem

    Jürgen Braun and Michael Griebel. On a constructive proof of Kolmogorov’s superpo- sition theorem. Constructive Approximation, 30:653–675, 2009

    work page 2009

  5. [5]

    Learning progressive joint propagation for human motion prediction

    Yujun Cai, Lin Huang, Yiwei Wang, Tat-Jen Cham, Jianfei Cai, Junsong Yuan, Jun Liu, Xu Yang, Yiheng Zhu, Xiaohui Shen, Ding Liu, Jing Liu, and Nadia Magnenat Thalmann. Learning progressive joint propagation for human motion prediction. In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    MSR- GCN: Multi-scale residual graph convolution networks for human motion prediction

    Lingwei Dang, Yongwei Nie, Chengjiang Long, Qing Zhang, and Guiqing Li. MSR- GCN: Multi-scale residual graph convolution networks for human motion prediction. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 11447–11456, 2021

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    CG-HOI: Contact-guided 3D human-object interac- tion generation

    Christian Diller and Angela Dai. CG-HOI: Contact-guided 3D human-object interac- tion generation. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion, pages 19888–19901, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Uncertainty-aware short- term motion prediction of traffic actors for autonomous driving

    Nemanja Djuric, Vladan Radosavljevic, Henggang Cui, Thi Nguyen, Fang-Chieh Chou, Tsung-Han Lin, Nitin Singh, and Jeff Schneiders. Uncertainty-aware short- term motion prediction of traffic actors for autonomous driving. In Proc. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    MotionWavelet: Human motion prediction via wavelet manifold learning

    Yuming Fenga, Zhiyang Dou, Ling-Hao Chen, Yuan Liu, Tianyu Li, Jingbo Wang, Zeyu Cao, Wenping Wang, Taku Komura, and Lingjie Liu. MotionWavelet: Human motion prediction via wavelet manifold learning. arXiv:2411.16964, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Recurrent net- work models for human dynamics

    Katerina Fragkiadaki, Sergey Levine, Panna Felsen, and Jitendra Malik. Recurrent net- work models for human dynamics. Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 4346–4354, 2015

    2015

  3. [11]

    Back to MLP: A simple baseline for human motion pre- diction

    Wen Guo, Yuming Du, Xi Shen, Vincent Lepetit, Xavier Alameda-Pineda, and Francesc Moreno-Noguer. Back to MLP: A simple baseline for human motion pre- diction. In Proc. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pages 4809–4819, 2023

    2023

  4. [12]

    Human3.6M: Large scale datasets and predictive methods for 3D human sensing in natural envi- ronments

    Catalin Ionescu, Dragos Papava, Vlad Olaru, and Cristian Sminchisescu. Human3.6M: Large scale datasets and predictive methods for 3D human sensing in natural envi- ronments. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 36(7): 1325–1339, 2014. 12 HASAN ET AL...

    2014

  5. [13]

    Zamir, Silvio Savarese, and Ashutosh Saxena

    Ashesh Jain, Amir R. Zamir, Silvio Savarese, and Ashutosh Saxena. Structural-RNN: Deep learning on spatio-temporal graphs. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5308–5317, 2016

    2016

  6. [14]

    Kingma and Jimmy Ba

    Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2015

    2015

  7. [15]

    Convolutional sequence to sequence model for human dynamics

    Chen Li, Zhen Zhang, Wee Sun Lee, and Gim Hee Lee. Convolutional sequence to sequence model for human dynamics. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 5226–5234, 2018

    2018

  8. [16]

    Dynamic multiscale graph neural networks for 3D skeleton-based human motion pre- diction

    Maosen Li, Siheng Chen, Yangheng Zhao, Ya Zhang, Yanfeng Wang, and Qi Tian. Dynamic multiscale graph neural networks for 3D skeleton-based human motion pre- diction. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 215–223, 2020

    2020

  9. [17]

    Skeleton- parted graph scattering networks for 3D human motion predictiont

    Maosen Li, Siheng Chen, Zijing Zhang, Lingxi Xie, Qi Tian, and Ya Zhang. Skeleton- parted graph scattering networks for 3D human motion predictiont. In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 18–36, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    Hou, and Max Tegmark

    Ziming Liu, Yixuan Wang, Sachin Vaidya, Fabian Ruehle, James Halverson, Marin Soljacic, Thomas Y . Hou, and Max Tegmark. KAN: Kolmogorov-arnold networks. In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Pro- gressively generating better initial guesses towards next stages for high-quality human motion prediction

    Tiezheng Ma, Yongwei Nie, Chengjiang Long, Qing Zhang, and Guiqing Li. Pro- gressively generating better initial guesses towards next stages for high-quality human motion prediction. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition, pages 6437–6446, 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    Troje, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Michael J

    Naureen Mahmood, Nima Ghorbani, Nikolaus F. Troje, Gerard Pons-Moll, and Michael J. Black. AMASS: Archive of motion capture as surface shapes. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019

    2019

  13. [21]

    Learning trajectory dependencies for human motion prediction

    Wei Mao, Miaomiao Liu, Mathieu Salzmann, and Hongdong Li. Learning trajectory dependencies for human motion prediction. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 9489–9497, 2019

    2019

  14. [22]

    History repeats itself: Human motion prediction via motion attention

    Wei Mao, Miaomiao Liu, and Mathieu Salzmann. History repeats itself: Human motion prediction via motion attention. In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision , pages 474–489, 2020

    2020

  15. [23]

    Black, and Javier Romero

    Julieta Martinez, Michael J. Black, and Javier Romero. On human motion prediction using recurrent neural networks. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 4674–4683, 2017

    2017

  16. [24]

    Context-based interpretable spatio-temporal graph convolutional network for human motion forecasting

    Edgar Medina, Leyong Loh, Namrata Gurung, Kyung Hun Oh, and Niels Heller. Context-based interpretable spatio-temporal graph convolutional network for human motion forecasting. In Proc. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Ömer Oruç. A new algorithm based on lucas polynomials for approximate solution of 1D and 2D nonlinear generalized Benjamin-Bona-Mahony-Burgers equation.Comput- ers and Mathematics with Applications, 74:3042–3057, 2017. HASAN ET AL.: LUKAN FOR 3D HUMAN MOTION PREDICTION 13

    2017

  18. [26]

    Hamprecht, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville

    Nasim Rahaman, Aristide Baratin, Devansh Arpit, Felix Draxler, Min Lin, Fred A. Hamprecht, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville. On the spectral bias of neural net- works. In Proc. International Conference on Maching Learning, 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    The Kolmogorov-Arnold representation theorem revisited

    Johannes Schmidt-Hieber. The Kolmogorov-Arnold representation theorem revisited. Neural Networks, 137:119–126, 2021

    2021

  20. [28]

    De- FeeNet: Consecutive 3D human motion prediction with deviation feedback

    Xiaoning Sun, Huaijiang Sun, Bin Li, Dong Wei, Weiqing Li, and Jianfeng Lu. De- FeeNet: Consecutive 3D human motion prediction with deviation feedback. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 5527–5536, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Recovering accurate 3D human pose in the wild using IMUs and a moving camera

    Timo von Marcard, Roberto Henschel, Michael Black Bodo J., Rosenhahn, and Gerard Pons-Moll. Recovering accurate 3D human pose in the wild using IMUs and a moving camera. In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision, 2018

    2018

  22. [30]

    Siegel, Ziming Liu, and Thomas Y

    Yixuan Wang, Jonathan W. Siegel, Ziming Liu, and Thomas Y . Hou. On the expres- siveness and spectral bias of KANs. In International Conference on Learning Repre- sentations, 2025

    2025

  23. [31]

    NeRMo: Learning implicit neural representations for 3D human motion prediction

    Dong Wei, Huaijiang Sun, Xiaoning Sun, and Shengxiang Hug. NeRMo: Learning implicit neural representations for 3D human motion prediction. In Proc. European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 409–427, 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    MotionNet: Joint perception and motion prediction for autonomous driving based on bird’s eye view maps

    Pengxiang Wu, Siheng Chen, and Dimitris Metaxas. MotionNet: Joint perception and motion prediction for autonomous driving based on bird’s eye view maps. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 11385–11395, 2020

    2020

  25. [33]

    T2M-GPT: Generating human motion from tex- tual descriptions with discrete representations

    Jianrong Zhang, Yangsong Zhang, Xiaodong Cun, Shaoli Huang, Yong Zhang, Hong- wei Zhao, Hongtao Lu, and Xi Shen. T2M-GPT: Generating human motion from tex- tual descriptions with discrete representations. In Proc. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 202...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.