ArticleFrontiers in neurorobotics2022
Miniature Autonomy as Means to Find New Approaches in Reliable Autonomous Driving AI Method Design.
Article in Frontiers in neurorobotics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Effects of Speed and Delays on Test-Time Performance of End-to-End Self-Driving.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) methods need to be evaluated thoroughly to ensure reliable behavior. In applications like autonomous driving, a complex environment with an uncountable number of different situations and conditions needs to be handled by a method whose behavior needs to be predictable. To accomplish this, simulations can be used as a first step. However, the physical world behaves differently, as the example of autonomous driving shows. There, erroneous behavior has been found in test drives that was not noticed in simulations. Errors were caused by conditions or situations that were not covered by the simulations (e.g., specific lighting conditions or other vehicle's behavior). However, the problem with real world testing of autonomous driving features is that critical conditions or situations occur very rarely-while the test effort is high. A solution can be the combination of physical world tests and simulations-and miniature vehicles as an intermediate step between both. With model cars (in a sufficiently complex model environment) advantages of both can be combined: (1) low test effort and a repeatable variation of conditions/situations as an advantage like in simulations and (2) (limited) physical world testing with unspecified and potentially unknown properties as an advantage like in real-world tests. Additionally, such physical tests can be carried out in less stable cases like already in the early stages of AI method testing and/or in approaches using online learning. Now, we propose to use a) miniature vehicles at a small scale of 1:87 and b) use sensors and computational power only on the vehicle itself. By this limitation, a further consequence is expected: Here, autonomy methods need to be optimized drastically or even redesigned from scratch. The resulting methods are supposed to be less complex-and, thus, again less error-prone. We call this approach "Miniature Autonomy" and apply it to the road, water, and aerial vehicles. In this article, we briefly describe a small test area we built (3 sqm.), a large test area used alternatively (1,545 sqm.), two last generation autonomous miniature vehicles (one road, one aerial vehicle), and an autonomous driving demo case demonstrating the application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.