The invention relates to a system and method for tracking objects. More particularly the invention relates to a system and method for tracking objects by using filters to make associations with objects, localizing objects, and processing the remaining objects using an optimization filter.
Object tracking systems are currently known and used. A limitation with current systems is the processing of information in a timely manner. Generally speaking, object tracking systems use a sensor such as radar or lidar to acquire data about an object that is detected within a predetermined range. The information is processed to calculate velocity vectors for each object so as to predict the location of the object in a predetermined time interval. The systems take another set of data so as to locate objects and then run an optimization filter to determine if the detected objects are associated with any one of the previously detected objects. Thus the system tracks objects in the predetermined area.
The information gathered by these sensors may be run through optimization filters which generate matrices associating each object with a previously detected object based upon factors such as the predicted location of the previously detected object, the color of the previously detected object, the height of the previously detected object, and the like. However, processing such matrices may be time consuming and inhibit the timeliness and effectiveness of current systems. Current platforms overcome these limitations by implementing hardware having robust processing speed and memory. However, such a countermeasure adds costs to implementation.
Accordingly it remains desirable to have an object tracking system which overcomes the limitations of the current art without having to increase the robustness of the hardware for processing such information.
According to one aspect of the invention an object tracking system is provided. The object tracking system is operable to minimize processing time for tracking objects. The system includes a sensor operable to detect objects in a predetermined geographic area. The system detects objects at predetermined intervals so as to define a first object group from the previous interval existing at the beginning of the predetermined interval and a second object group detected at the end of the predetermined interval. The system is operable to repeat the intervals so as to perform tracking operations.
The system further includes a processor in communication with the sensor. The processor is operable to determine which of the objects may be dynamic so as to generate the second group. The processor is further operable to process information from the first group to predict the location for each of the dynamic objects. More specifically the processor is operable to predict where each of the dynamic location objects will be at the end of the predetermined interval. The predictions may be based upon the detected object's vector.
The system further includes a pair of filters operable to make associations between dynamic objects from the first group and objects from the second group so as to track the dynamic objects within a geographic area. The processor processes the predicted location of dynamic objects from the first group and objects from the second group through the pair of filters.
One of the pair of filters makes art association between objects from the second group as being a dynamic object from the first group when the predicted location of the previously detected objects is within a predetermined distance of objects from the second group. The other of the pair of filters considers all of the objects jointly and makes an association based upon the probability that the objects from the second group are the dynamic objects of the first group. More specifically the second filter uses the predicted location of all of the dynamic objects from the first group to compute the probability that the objects of the second group are any one of the predetermined predicted locations of the dynamic objects from the first group. When the probability that a dynamic object from the second group is a dynamic object from the first group is above a predetermined probability, the filter makes an association so as to track the dynamic objects from the second group as arriving from the location of the dynamic object of the first group.
The remaining unassociated dynamic objects are then localized so as to form discrete matrices. These discrete matrices are processed by an optimization filter. More specifically the discrete matrices are composed of unassociated dynamic objects from the second group and unassociated detected objects from the first group which have the probability of being associated. The remaining unassociated objects are further processed as being either discarded, meaning they have dropped from the range of the predetermined area, or as being new objects having entered the predetermined geographic area. The system is further operable to process the remaining unassociated objects into an optimization filter.
A method for tracking objects is also provided herein. The method includes the steps of: (1) generating a group of dynamic objects from the previous iteration; (2) predicting where each dynamic object will be after a predetermined time; (3) detecting objects within a predetermined geographic area after a predetermined time; (4) determining if any of the detected objects are within a predetermined distance of the predicted location of the dynamic objects; (5) associating any of the detected objects with the previously detected dynamic objects wherein the objects are within a predetermined distance of the predicted location of the previously detected objects; (6) associating any of the newly detected objects as being the previously detected objects when the probability of the newly detected object is above a predetermined probability that it is the previously detected object; (7) localizing the remaining unassociated dynamic objects with the previously unassociated detected objects; and (8) running an optimization filter for each of the localized groups of unassociated dynamic objects. Accordingly the use of localized groups for reducing the amount and the size of matrices for the optimization filters is used so as to reduce processing time for tracking objects.
Advantages of the present invention will be readily appreciated as the same becomes understood by reference to the following detailed description when considered in connection with the accompanying figures wherein:
Referring to
The system 10 includes a memory storage system 14 used for storing detected objects from the previous iteration so as to define a first object group of dynamic objects at the beginning of the predetermined interval. The memory storage system 14 may be an internal hard drive in electrical communication with a processor 18.
The system 10 includes a sensor 20 operable to detect objects within a predetermined geographic area. The system 10 is operable to detect these objects at a predetermined interval so as to define a cycle 22. The cycle 22 includes a first object group 16 (also referenced herein as previously detected objects) detected at the beginning of the predetermined interval and a second object group 24 (also referenced herein as newly detected objects) detected at the end of the predetermined interval. The sensor 20 is operable to provide the objects in the form of discrete points of data as shown in
The processor 18 is in communication with the sensor 20. The processor 18 is operable to determine which of the objects are dynamic. Dynamic, as used herein, refers to an object having a vector or capable of being autonomously displaced. The processor 18 is further operable to predict the location for each of the dynamic objects in the first object group 16. More specifically the processor 18 is operable to predict where the objects of the first object group 16 will be at the end of the predetermined interval.
The processor 18 may use the size of the detected object so as to determine whether or not the object is dynamic. Determination of a dynamic object may further be refined so as to classify the dynamic object as being a pedestrian, a vehicle 26, or an animal. For instance the data points may be processed through a filter 12 which can profile the relationship of each data point with respect to the environment so as to determine whether the silhouette of the dynamic object fits one of either an animal, a pedestrian, a vehicle 26, or a fixed structure such as a building. Thus, objects which have a profile of a building are determined to be non-dynamic, whereas objects determined to be one of either an animal, a pedestrian, or a vehicle 26 is determined to be dynamic, regardless of whether the dynamic object has a vector.
With reference now to
The processor 18 may be in further communication with a coordinate system 10 such as a global positioning system 10. The processor 18 may include a mapping module 28 so as to associate the detected objects with a respective coordinate on a map. The map may be generated and updated based upon the current location of the system 10. Accordingly, in applications such as a vehicle 26 platform, the predetermined area is not necessarily a fixed location.
The system 10 further includes a pair of filters 12 operable to perform association so as to associate dynamic objects from the first group with dynamic objects from the second group thereby tracking the dynamic objects. The processor 18 processes the predicted location of dynamic objects from the first group and objects from the second group through the pair of filters 12. One of the pair of filters 12 associates objects from the second group with the corresponding dynamic object from the first group when the predicted location of the dynamic objects from the first group is within a predetermined distance of the objects from the second group.
With reference now to
Assume that an association is made where a newly detected object is within 0.2 meters of the predicted location of a previously detected object. In this case, P1 (predicted location of a previously detected object) is 0.19 meters of N1 (newly detected object) and 0.5 meters of N2, and P2 is 0.1 meters from N2 and 0.4 meters from N1. Accordingly, the association may be made that N1 is P1 and N2 is P2.
However in cases where there are multiple objects being detected at one time, such an association strategy may an ineffective. Accordingly association may be conducted based upon weighted factors. With reference now to
The remaining unassociated objects are then processed through the second of the pair of filters 12. Associating dynamic objects from the first group with dynamic objects from the second group may also be based upon probability. For instance, the second pair of filters 12 associates each of the dynamic objects from the first object group 16 with one of the corresponding objects in the second object group 24 when the probability that the object from the second group is the dynamic object from the first group is greater than a predetermined probability.
For instance, assuming that the probability that P1 could be N2 is 10% and that the probability of P1 being N1 is 60% and that the probability of P2 being N1 is also 60%, the probability of P2 being N2 is 50%, the filter 12 may weight the probability of one being greater than the other. In such a case, since the probability of P1 being N2 is low relative to the probability that P2 is N2, the processor 18 may then assume that P1 is N1 and P2 is N2 even though the probability that P1 is N1 and that P2 is N1 is the same.
Association based upon probability and distance may be made in numerous ways, and the previous examples are provided for illustrative purposes and are not limiting. In certain instances, associations made through the pair of filters 12 does not associate every newly detected object with a previously detected object, thus certain objects are not tracked. The remaining unassociated objects are then further processed by a localization filter 12.
The localization filter 12 is operable to sort unassociated objects from second object groups 24 into a plurality of discrete categories. Preferably, the localization filter 12 uses association to associate unassociated objects from the second group with unassociated dynamic objects from the first group. In one embodiment, the localization filter 12 establishes a geographic boundary to perform localization.
With reference to
With reference now to
With reference now to
The environment in which object tracking systems 10 are deployed is very fluid, meaning at any given time new objects may enter into the predetermined geographic area or may leave the predetermined geographic area. In cases where objects leave, an assumption may be made that an object left the geographic area based upon the velocity vector of the object and the predicted location of the object at a given time. However in some instances the predicted location of the object is not outside of the predetermined geographic area of the sensor 20. The system 10 further includes a counting module operable to help determine whether an unassociated object is missing. The counting module is operable to discard an unassociated object from further processing after a predetermined number of intervals. More specifically, if an object detected at the beginning of the predetermined interval is not accounted for in subsequent cycles 22, then the system 10 discards that object from further processing.
The counting module includes a threshold for discarding an unassociated object. The threshold is based upon the number of times the dynamic object was associated. Accordingly, the longer the object is tracked, the higher the threshold is prior to discarding. The count may also be weighted based upon the distance between the tracked object and the sensor 20. For instance, it is extremely unlikely that a pedestrian within close proximity will not be sensed due to noise. At long distances there is much more noise. Therefore, the threshold should be high at short distances and low at long distances as shown in
The system 10 further includes a segmentation module that is operable to provide an artificial dynamic object for each of the unassociated dynamic objects from the first and second object groups 16, 24. The segmentation module takes into account the fact that the objects may either move out of range of the predetermined geographic area or that new objects may come in. Thus the final association matrix includes an association for each object in the geographic area. In some cases these objects may be artificial dynamic objects having an association or may be based upon association or an optimization filter 12.
With reference now to
The objects are then processed using a association wherein any objects within the predetermined distance of a predicted object are associated with that object. A second association is made using the probability that a new object is one of the previously detected objects. The probability is based upon the probability that the newly detected objects match the predicted location of any one of the previously detected objects.
The remaining unassociated objects are then localized so as to reduce the size of the matrix prior to performing or processing the objects through an optimization filter 12. Localization may be done linearly based upon distance or probability. Accordingly the system 10 and method herein provide an object tracking system 10 which is operable to reduce the processing time for tracking objects so as to minimize the requirement of a robust processor 18 or a relatively large storage medium. The system 10 and method does this by utilizing associations between newly detected objects and previously detected objects.
The tracked objects may be integrated into a collision warning system 10, whereby information regarding the tracked objects is processed so as to generate a warning when a collision is predicted. Such systems 10 are currently known and used in the art.
The invention has been described in an illustrative manner. It is to be understood that the terminology which has been used is intended to be in the nature of words of description rather than limitation. Many modifications and variations of the invention are possible in light of the above teachings. Therefore, within the scope of the appended claims, the invention may be practiced other than as specifically described.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2903002 | Adkins | Sep 1959 | A |
| 3430851 | Abt | Mar 1969 | A |
| 3658249 | Sharpe | Apr 1972 | A |
| 4924418 | Bachman et al. | May 1990 | A |
| 4949277 | Trovato et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
| 5006988 | Borenstein et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5170352 | McTamaney et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
| 5277208 | Mansur | Jan 1994 | A |
| 5423340 | Campbell et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
| 5487117 | Burges et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5508689 | Rado et al. | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5544282 | Chen et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
| 5644386 | Jenkins et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
| 5680313 | Whittaker et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
| 5696674 | Trovato et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5870303 | Trovato et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
| 5954071 | Magliocca | Sep 1999 | A |
| 6018308 | Shirai | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6026189 | Greenspan | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6108597 | Kirchner et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6111521 | Mulder et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
| 6173066 | Peurach et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6205380 | Bauer et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6236749 | Satonaka et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6252520 | Asami et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
| 6259377 | Noecker et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6324135 | Kim et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6336128 | Eisenmann et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6359552 | King | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6405877 | Nemedi et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6421463 | Poggio et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
| 6445308 | Koike | Sep 2002 | B1 |
| 6470271 | Matsunaga | Oct 2002 | B2 |
| 6608913 | Hinton et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6677941 | Lin | Jan 2004 | B2 |
| 6714127 | Perez et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 6728607 | Anderson | Apr 2004 | B1 |
| 6728608 | Ollis et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
| 6765495 | Dunning et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6766037 | Le et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
| 6775396 | Matsunaga | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6799100 | Burns et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
| 6823261 | Sekiguchi | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6826293 | Matsunaga | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6845324 | Smith | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6850824 | Breed | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6861957 | Koike | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6944543 | Prakah-Asante et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
| 6988026 | Breed et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7054505 | Shyu | May 2006 | B2 |
| 7084882 | Dorum et al. | Aug 2006 | B1 |
| 7146991 | Stockert | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7149660 | Kuehn et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
| 7206677 | Hulden | Apr 2007 | B2 |
| 7218758 | Ishii et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
| 7239956 | Sonoda et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7248968 | Reid | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7263412 | Gutmann et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7263509 | Lee et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
| 7317417 | Arikan et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
| 7343039 | Liu et al. | Mar 2008 | B2 |
| 7363515 | Frazier et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
| 7386163 | Sabe et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
| 7421415 | Dong et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
| 7447593 | Estkowski et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
| 7467034 | Breed et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
| 7477780 | Boncyk et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7480414 | Brown et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
| 7496449 | Samukawa et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7532130 | Curtis | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7539557 | Yamauchi | May 2009 | B2 |
| 7558762 | Owechko et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
| 7598848 | Takagi et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
| 7639841 | Zhu et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7659835 | Jung | Feb 2010 | B2 |
| 7660649 | Hope et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
| 7706944 | Tanaka et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 7720580 | Higgins-Luthman | May 2010 | B2 |
| 7891004 | Gelvin et al. | Feb 2011 | B1 |
| 7929730 | Huang et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
| 8024084 | Breed | Sep 2011 | B2 |
| 20020186146 | Mikhaylenko et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020196975 | Cahill | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030122687 | Trajkovic et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20040158355 | Holmqvist et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040246144 | Siegel et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050002572 | Saptharishi et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015201 | Fields et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050088318 | Liu et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050093717 | Lilja | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050131581 | Sabe et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050131629 | Ignatin | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050157931 | Delashmit et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050182534 | Legate et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050197775 | Smith | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050223176 | Peters | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050237224 | Gotfried | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050286767 | Hager et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060025888 | Gutmann et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060058931 | Ariyur et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
| 20060103927 | Samukawa et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060110029 | Kazui et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
| 20060161335 | Beinhaker | Jul 2006 | A1 |
| 20060200333 | Dalal et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060222205 | Porikli et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060241827 | Fukuchi et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20060262007 | Bonthron et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20060271254 | Shah et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
| 20070036434 | Saveliev | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070043502 | Mudalige et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070080825 | Shiller | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20070127816 | Balslev et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
| 20070156312 | Breed et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070188349 | Staniszewski | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070217676 | Grauman et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
| 20070265741 | Ol et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070280528 | Wellington et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20070293985 | Myeong et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080015777 | Heimberger et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080021625 | Ohtomo | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080025568 | Han et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080027591 | Lenser et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080042895 | Inaba | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080046125 | Myeong et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080074312 | Cross et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080077294 | Danz et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080187227 | Bober et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080208778 | Sayyar-Rodsari et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080243439 | Runkle et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20080284575 | Breed | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20090043462 | Stratton et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090067730 | Schneiderman | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090103779 | Loehlein et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090149990 | Myeong et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090171567 | Morimoto et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090192955 | Tang et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20090210362 | Xiao et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20090245573 | Saptharishi et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
| 20090310867 | Matei et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
| 20100017115 | Gautama | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100023251 | Gale et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100046799 | Saptharishi et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100092073 | Prokhorov | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20100299013 | Dolgov et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
| 20110169625 | James et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 200705114 | Jun 2009 | BR |
| 10037849 | Feb 2002 | DE |
| 10148063 | Apr 2003 | DE |
| 102010001383 | Aug 2011 | DE |
| 2955893 | Aug 2001 | FR |
| 51148076 | Dec 1976 | JP |
| 647353 | Feb 1994 | JP |
| 985189 | Mar 1997 | JP |
| 10283478 | Oct 1998 | JP |
| 10293478 | Nov 1998 | JP |
| 2001-301485 | Oct 2001 | JP |
| 2002303671 | Oct 2002 | JP |
| 2006011880 | Jan 2006 | JP |
| 200648568 | Feb 2006 | JP |
| 2006047353 | Feb 2006 | JP |
| 2006048568 | Feb 2006 | JP |
| 2007142517 | Jun 2007 | JP |
| 20040053912 | Jun 2004 | KR |
| WO2009076214 | Jun 2009 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Dung at al., “Mixed Reinforcement Learning for Partially Observable Markov Decision Process,” Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation, pp. 7-12, Jun. 2007. |
| Theocharous at al., “Approximate Planning with Hierarchical Partially Observable Markov Decision Process Models for Robot Navigation,” Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 1347-1352,May 2002. |
| James et al., “SarsaLandmark: An Algorithm for Learning in POMDPs with Landmarks,” Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 585-592, May 2009. |
| Peters et al., “Acquisition of Topological Action Maps through Teleoperation,” Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation, Apr. 2004, pp. 4565-4570. |
| Anguelov et al., “Discriminative Learning of Markov Random Fields for Segmentation of 3D Scan Data,” Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR '05), 2005, pp. 1-8. |
| Bache et al., “Odin: Team VictorTango's Entry in the DARPA Urban Challenge,” Journal of Field Robotics 25(8), 2008, pp. 467-492. |
| Bradski et al., Learning Open CV: Computer Vision with the OpenCV Library, Sep. 24, 2008; Table of Contents, 4 pages; Chapter 13, Sections 13.6-13.8.2, 25 pages. |
| Dahlkamp et al., “Self-supervised Monocular Road Detection in Desert Terrain,” Robotics: Science and Systems, 2006, 7 pages. |
| Diebel at al., “An Application of Markov Random Fields to Range Sensing,” Proceedings of Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), 2005, 8 pages. |
| Frome et al., “Recognizing Objects in Range Data Using Regional Point Descriptors,” Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), May 2004, 14 pages. |
| Hadsell et al., “Accurate Rough Terrain Estimation with Space-Carving Kernels,” Proceedings of Science and Systems, Jun. 2009, 8 pages. |
| Johnson, et al., “Using Spin Images for Efficient Object Recognition in Cluttered 3D Scenes,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 21, No. 5, May 1999, pp. 433-449. |
| Lu at al., “A Hybrid Conditional Random Field for Estimating the Underlying Ground Surface from Airborne LiDAR Data,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 47, Issue 8, Jul. 2009, 11 pages. |
| Montemerlo et al., “Junior. The Stanford Entry in the Urban Challenge,” Journal of Field Robotics, 25(9), 2008, pp. 569-597. |
| Munoz et al., “Contextual Classification with Functional Max-Margin Markov Networks,” IEEE Computer Socienty Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Jun. 2009, 8 pages. |
| Sithole et al., “Experimental comparison of filter algorithms for bare-Earth extraction from airborne laser scanning point clouds,” ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 59, 2004, pp. 85-101. |
| Urmson et al., “Autonomous Driving in Urban Environments: Boss and the Urban Challenge,” Journal of Field Robotics 25(8), 2008, pp. 425-466. |
| Wellington et al., “A Generative Model of Terrain for Autonomous Navigation in Vegetation,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, 25(12), 2006, 15 pages. |
| Winkler, Image Analysis, Random Fields and Dynamic Monte Carlo Methods: A Mathematical Introduction, 2003, pp. 47-61. |
| Wolf et al., “Autonomous Terrain Mapping and Classification Using Hidden Markov Models,”Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2005, pp. 2038-2043. |
| Diesel Engine Online Monitoring Based on Smart Order Tracking Sensor System; Cheng Lijun; Zhang Yingtang; Li Zhining; Ren Guoquan; Li Jianwei; Measuring Technology and Mechatronics Automation (ICMTMA), 2011 Third International Conference on vol. 1; Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/ICMTMA.2011.270; Publication Year: 2011, pp. 1079-1082. |
| Cooperative Maneuvering in Close Environments Among Cybercars and Dual-Mode Cars; Milanes, V., Alonso, J.; Bouraoui, L.; Ploeg, J.; Intelligent Transportaion Systems, IEEE Transactions on; vol. 12, Issue: 1; Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/TITS.2012.2050060; Publication Year: 2011, pp. 15-24. |
| Extrinsic calibration between a multi-layer lidar and a camera; Rodriguez F, S.A.; Fremont, V,; Bonnifait, P.; Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems, 2008, MFI 2008. IEEE International Conference on; Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/MFI.2008.4648067; Publication Year: 2008, pp. 214-219. |
| Study of Control Algorithm for Smart Car System; Ruixian Li; Information and Computing (ICIC), 2011 Fourth International Conference on; Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/ICIC.2011.113; Publication Year: 2011, pp. 184-187. |
| A Comparitive Study of Different Sensors for Smart Car Park Management; Kumar, R.; Chilamkurti, N.K.; Ben Soh; Intelligent Pervasive Computing, 2007. IPC. The 2007 International Conference on; Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/IPC.2007.29 Publication Year: 2007, pp. 499-502. |
| Multipriority video transmission for third-generation wireless communication systems; Gharavi, H.; Alamouti, S.M.; Proceedings of the IEEE; vol. 87, Issue: 10; Digital Object Identifier; 10.1109/5.790635 Publication Year: 1999, p. 9s): 1751-1763. |
| The ENVISAT data products; Levrini, G.; Brooker, G.;Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, 2000, Proceedings. IGARSS 2000. IEEE 2000 International; vol. 3; Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/IGARSS.2000.858066 Publication Year: 2000, pp. 1198-1201 vol. 3. |
| A methodological framework for integrated control in corridor networks; Pavlis, Y.; Recker, W.; Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2001. Proceedings. 2001 1EEE; Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/ITSC.2001.948734; Publication Year: 2001, pp. 637-642. |
| Adaptive and cooperative multi-agent fuzzy system architecture; Daneshfar, F.; Akhlaghian, F.; Mansoori, F.; Computer Conference, 2009. CSICC 2009. 14th International CSI; Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/CSICC.2009.5349439 Publication Year: 2009, pp. 30-34. |
| Freund, Yoav et al., “A Short Introduction to Boosting,” Journal of Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence, vol. 14, No. 5, pp. 771-780, Sep. 1999. |
| U.S. Appl. No. 12/252,080, filed Oct. 15, 2008, Inventor: Danil V. Prokhorov. |
| International Search Report Issued Dec. 22, 2011 in corresponding PCT/US11/47153. |
| Mobileye NV. Feb. 2004, , Pedestrian Protection Two Pages. |
| Premebida et al., A Lidar and Vision-based Approach for Pedestrian and Vehicle Detection and Tracking, Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE, Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference Seattle, WA, USA, Sep. 30-Oct. 3, 2007 pp. 1044-1049. |
| Takagi Kiyokazu, Pedestrian Recognition Using on-vehicle LIDAR, Science Links Japan, Gateway to Japan's Scientific and Technical Information, 2006-2007 Japan Science and Technology Agency. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20130031045 A1 | Jan 2013 | US |