Optimisation of highway vehicle occlusion recognition based on attention and multitasking approach
17 mars 2025
À propos de cet article
Publié en ligne: 17 mars 2025
Reçu: 18 oct. 2024
Accepté: 12 févr. 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2025-0180
Mots clés
© 2025 Shifeng Feng, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Figure 7.

Figure 8.

Comparison of different methods for detecting occluded vehicles
Data set | Model | P/% | R/% | F1/% | MSE | MAE |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
COCO | Mask R-CNN | 79.33 | 82.29 | 80.81 | 0.04 | 0.06 |
Faster R-CNN | 84.69 | 84.17 | 84.43 | 0.02 | 0.04 | |
YOLOv7 | 89.75 | 88.74 | 89.32 | 0.02 | 0.02 | |
Our method | 93.28 | 92.47 | 92.82 | 0.01 | 0.02 | |
ApolloScape | Mask R-CNN | 84.25 | 86.54 | 85.41 | 0.03 | 0.06 |
Faster R-CNN | 86.69 | 88.15 | 87.36 | 0.03 | 0.05 | |
YOLOv7 | 89.51 | 90.33 | 89.51 | 0.03 | 0.04 | |
Our method | 92.23 | 93.82 | 92.62 | 0.01 | 0.02 |
Comparison of model detection results under different occlusion conditions
Occlusion rate | Method | Color precision/% | Vehicle type precision/% | Detection time/s |
---|---|---|---|---|
20% | Mask R-CNN | 79.08 | 87.22 | 1.04 |
Faster R-CNN | 76.33 | 72.23 | 1.46 | |
YOLOv7 | 82.81 | 73.52 | 1.22 | |
Our method | 91.74 | 93.49 | 0.29 | |
40% | Mask R-CNN | 80.13 | 79.45 | 0.93 |
Faster R-CNN | 75.62 | 86.51 | 0.77 | |
YOLOv7 | 82.77 | 89.52 | 0.61 | |
Our method | 90.06 | 89.06 | 0.44 | |
60% | Mask R-CNN | 80.45 | 80.94 | 0.55 |
Faster R-CNN | 83.92 | 78.25 | 1.94 | |
YOLOv7 | 76.76 | 83.49 | 0.74 | |
Our method | 94.56 | 88.67 | 0.21 | |
80% | Mask R-CNN | 78.77 | 81.47 | 1.28 |
Faster R-CNN | 82.36 | 84.22 | 1.18 | |
YOLOv7 | 84.58 | 87.11 | 1.92 | |
Our method | 92.52 | 88.16 | 0.53 |