Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 60 references

World Model-Based End-to-End Scene Generation for Accident Anticipation in Autonomous Driving

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that world-model-generated dashcam negatives improve accident anticipation, and that a depth-aware graph-temporal network achieves the best reported AP and mTTA on DAD, A3D, and the new AoTA benchmark.

desk verdict New benchmark and a plausible world-model data pipeline, but the central augmentation claim lacks a real-data control and several reported numbers don't match the tables. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.12762 v1 pith:JN6PE66A submitted 2025-07-17 cs.CV cs.LG

Yanchen Guan , Haicheng Liao , Chengyue Wang , Xingcheng Liu , Jiaxun Zhang , Zhenning Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.LG
keywords AutonomousdrivingAccidentanticipationWorldmodelDataaugmentationGraphconvolutionalnetworksDilatedtemporalconvolutionDashcamvideoSyntheticgeneration
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 two bottlenecks in accident anticipation—too few diverse accident-adjacent videos and missing object cues under occlusion, weather, or blur—can be relaxed jointly. A vision-language model decomposes real dashcam videos into scene factors such as weather, lighting, road condition, and setting, and a world model then re-synthesizes new dashcam clips from the same factor distributions, producing extra negative videos for training. On the inference side, the proposed network uses depth-corrected graph edges and multi-layer dilated temporal convolutions to process full clips rather than isolated frames. On the DAD, A3D, and the authors' new AoTA/AoTA+ benchmarks, the paper reports state-of-the-art AP and mTTA, with synthetic-data augmentation raising AP by an average of 2.5% and by up to 6.7% on DAD.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the deconstruction-and-reconstruction loop for driving scenes, paired with a depth-aware graph edge formula on the prediction side. In the loop, a video vision-language model converts dashcam footage into a factor distribution covering weather, lighting, road condition, and setting, with consistency checks; a world model conditioned on those factors, an HD map built from real accident-report coordinates, simulated traffic flow, and an end-to-end agent's planned trajectory renders new negative clips. The inference-side identity is the edge weight $Weight_{ij} = \frac{a}{a+1}e^{-D_{ij}} + \frac{1}{a+1}Vel_{ij}$, where $D_{ij} = \sqrt{Dist_{ij}^2 + Depth_{ij}^2}$ replaces planar pixel distance with a depth-corrected distance and $Vel_{ij}$ is the relative velocity between agents. Dilated temporal convolutions then expand the receptive field from a single frame to eight frames, so transient detections and outliers do not break the temporal signal.

What would settle it

Run the augmentation twice on DAD and AoTA: once with the generated negatives and once with the same number of real non-accident dashcam clips matched on scene factors. If the real-negative control reproduces or beats the reported gains (2.5% average AP, up to 6.7% on DAD), the world-model-fidelity premise is falsified; if only the synthetic set improves AP, the premise survives.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors' central claim is that world-model-generated negative driving footage can serve as effective training augmentation for accident anticipation, and that their dynamic graph-temporal model is the best-performing method on three benchmarks. The generation pipeline keeps the target distribution stable: scene factors extracted from real videos become prompts; coordinates from published accident reports anchor locations; road networks, traffic flow, and an end-to-end driving agent supply layout and ego motion; and a diffusion-based world model renders temporally coherent dashcam frames. The generated video set achieves a spatiotemporal quality score of 36.38 against DAD, and when mixed into training sets it improves AP by an average of 2.5% with mTTA effectively unchanged, and by up to 6.7% AP on DAD when negative samples are raised by 40%. The prediction model derives edge weights from depth-augmented distance and relative velocity, aggregates node features through graph convolution, and uses dilated convolutions whose three layers extend the receptive field to eight frames before a gated recurrent unit with a time-weighted cross-entropy loss. Replacing real negatives with generated ones degrades performance, which the authors take as evidence that generated data is a supplement to, not a substitute for, real footage.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the generated videos, despite visible artifacts such as inconsistent lane lines and deformed vehicles, are close enough in feature distribution to real dashcam footage that training on them improves real-world accident prediction; the paper does not compare against adding the same number of real non-accident videos, so this closeness is plausible but untested.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Enlarging training sets with generated negative dashcam clips is a practical route to easing data scarcity, since the pipeline needs only existing videos, public maps, and accident-report coordinates.
  • Anticipation accuracy rises as generated negatives are added in increasing fractions (10% to 40% on DAD), but replacing real negatives with generated ones drops AP by 2.4%, so generated data is best used as extra data rather than a substitute.
  • Across every tested baseline on AoTA versus AoTA+, the added generated negatives raise AP by 2.5% on average while mTTA stays close, meaning the accuracy gain does not come at the cost of lead time.
  • Ablation results attribute most of the model's performance to the dynamic graph component and the adaptive adjacency matrix, with AP falling 41.7% when the GCN is removed and 7.1% when the adaptive adjacency is replaced by a fully connected matrix.
  • The AoTA dataset, with 3,600 accident clips whose start times are randomly distributed and 1,200 negatives with more balanced weather and day/night coverage, offers a new cross-context benchmark for accident anticipation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An untested control in the paper suggests a caution for interpretation: the augmentation gains could come from having more negative samples rather than from world-model fidelity; adding a matched number of real non-accident clips would separate volume from realism.
  • The same deconstruction-reconstruction loop should transfer to any controllable world model, so the method's value is probably less about the specific renderer and more about keeping the prompt distribution aligned with the target dataset.
  • The depth-augmented edge formula suggests a testable extension: supplying metric depth from stereo or LiDAR instead of estimated monocular depth should improve AP further, because $D_{ij}$ would no longer inherit depth-estimation error.
  • Because the paper's own failure analysis points to ego-motion-induced perspective change as a recurring failure cause, compensating the temporal module for ego camera motion is a natural next step that the current framework does not take.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a two-part framework for accident anticipation in dashcam videos. First, a data-augmentation pipeline uses Video-LLaVA to extract scene-level domain knowledge from real videos and then uses the World Dreamer world model, conditioned on prompts, HD maps, and SUMO/UniAD traffic simulation, to generate synthetic non-accident driving videos that are added to the training set. Second, a prediction model combines a dynamic graph convolutional network with adaptive edge weights (based on depth-enhanced distances and relative velocities) and multi-layer dilated temporal convolutions followed by a GRU. The authors also introduce the AoTA dataset of 4,800 clips compiled from DoTA and BDD100K. Experiments on DAD, A3D, AoTA, and AoTA+ report state-of-the-art AP and mTTA values and claim that the synthetic data augmentation improves AP by an average of 2.5% (up to 4.4%) across models.

Significance. If the central claims are established, the paper would make two useful contributions: a practical way to mitigate data scarcity in accident anticipation via world-model-generated negative scenes, and a strong temporal/spatial model that advances the state of the art on multiple benchmarks. The release of a new dataset (AoTA) and the provision of code and data links are concrete assets for the community. The paper also includes an FVD-based quality assessment of generated videos and an ablation study of the model modules, both of which are good scientific practice. However, the key claim about the benefit of synthetic data currently rests on experiments that lack a control condition and contain an internal numerical inconsistency, so the significance of the augmentation component is not yet demonstrated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Results / Table 3 and 'AoTA+' description in Methods] The central claim that world-model-generated synthetic negative videos improve accident anticipation is confounded by the absence of a control condition. In Table 2 (AoTA vs AoTA+) and Table 3 (DAD with 10–40% added generated negatives), the comparison always adds generated negatives to the training set but never adds the same number of real non-accident videos. Because AP on imbalanced accident data can improve simply from adding negative samples (rebalancing the decision boundary), the observed gains cannot be attributed to the fidelity or distributional properties of the generated data. Please add a control experiment that augments the training set with an equal number of real negative clips (e.g., from BDD100K or held-out DAD negatives) and report the resulting AP and mTTA. Without this control, the paper's main contribution, the 'driving scene generation framework for data augmentation,' is not supported.
  2. [Results / Table 2] The text states that introducing synthetic video data led to 'an average AP increase of 2.5%, and a maximum improvement of 4.4%,' but the numbers in Table 2 do not match this. For the four models with AoTA and AoTA+ results (UString, DSTA, AccNet, and Ours), the AP increases are 1.2, 1.0, 1.7, and 3.3 percentage points, respectively, giving an average of 1.8 and a maximum of 3.3. Please reconcile the text with the table or correct the table. This is load-bearing because the augmentation benefit is the paper's headline claim, and the reported magnitude is inconsistent with the data shown.
  3. [Methods, Eqs. (5) and (6)] The proposed distance measure in Eq. (5) combines Dist_ij, which is normalized by the diagonal pixel distance and hence dimensionless, with Depth_ij = |D_i - D_j|, which is presumably a metric depth difference in some physical unit (e.g., meters). Computing a Euclidean norm of a dimensionless quantity and a physical quantity is dimensionally inconsistent, and the result will be dominated by whatever scale the depth network outputs. Since this distance directly determines the edge weight in Eq. (6), the model's spatial reasoning may be sensitive to an arbitrary scaling. Please clarify the units of the depth values, normalize both terms consistently (e.g., divide depth by a reference depth range), and justify the combination. Also specify whether Vel_ij can be negative (when agents approach) and how the edge weight remains well-defined in that case.
  4. [Results and Table 2 (DAD comparison)] The abstract and Results claim a '7.0% AP and 9.1% mTTA' improvement over previous state-of-the-art on DAD. With the numbers reported in Table 2, the best prior AP is 80.8 (MASTTA) and the proposed model achieves 83.2 AP in the balanced row and 86.3 in the best-AP row; the corresponding absolute differences are 2.4 and 5.5 percentage points, and mTTA differences are 0.67 s (balanced row) or 0.26 s (best-AP row) over MASTTA's 3.32 s. None of these direct comparisons yields exactly 7.0% and 9.1%; if the claimed values are relative improvements, or refer to a different baseline (e.g., THAT-NET), please state the baseline and the calculation explicitly. As written, the improvement claim is ambiguous and should be corrected for precision.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction and Figure 7 caption] The phrase 'Dynamic Graph Conventional Network' should be 'Dynamic Graph Convolutional Network'; the typo appears in the Introduction and in the Figure 7 caption.
  2. [Eq. (1) and notation] The variable N is described as 'number of total features of both frame and objects,' but N appears to be the number of objects in the graph (Det has shape B x T x (N-1) x F, suggesting N-1 objects plus a global feature). Please clarify the notation to avoid confusion.
  3. [Eq. (2)] The adaptive adjacency matrix A is defined as B x T x N x N, but V1 and V2 are introduced as B x N x N matrices without a time dimension. Please specify how the time dimension is handled (e.g., shared across frames or indexed by t).
  4. [Table 1] In Table 1, the DAD row leaves 'Day/Night' blank and the 'Accident Reasons' and 'Day/Night' columns use only checkmarks without explanation; please include a legend or clarify what the blank entries mean, and double-check whether DAD includes nighttime footage.
  5. [Methods, Driving Scene Reconstruction] The paper states that 'the width and height of the output image are set to be consistent with the original video,' but the original videos in DAD, A3D, and AoTA may have different resolutions; please specify which resolution is used for generated videos and how this affects downstream feature extraction.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the augmentation conclusion is empirical, though its interpretation is confounded by the lack of a real-negative-video control.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are empirical and benchmarked against external datasets. The accident anticipation model (Eqs. 2-13) is a standard GCN/LSTM/dilated-convolution pipeline, and the learned adaptive weight a in Eq. (6) is a trained model parameter, not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. The data-augmentation claim is evaluated by training on AoTA versus AoTA+ and on DAD with 10-40% added negatives, with test sets held fixed. The synthetic videos are produced by an external world model (World Dreamer, ref. [42]) and are validated by FVD (36.38) against real DAD videos; no step in the generation pipeline reduces by construction to the observed AP gain. The one self-referential element is that the prompt factor distribution is extracted from the same AoTA negatives that are later augmented, but this preserves the training distribution and does not by itself force the reported improvement. The lack of a control that adds the same number of real non-accident videos is a genuine confound, since more negative data can raise AP in class-imbalanced settings, but that is a correctness risk rather than a circularity. I also note that the Results text claims an average AP increase of 2.5% and a maximum of 4.4%, while the increments in Table 2 are 1.2, 1.0, 1.7, and 3.3 percentage points (average 1.8%, maximum 3.3%); this numeric inconsistency weakens the augmentation conclusion but is not an equation-level circularity. No uniqueness theorem and no load-bearing self-citation are invoked. Score 1 reflects only the mild self-referential augmentation design.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the distributional fidelity of off-the-shelf VLM and world model outputs, and on the untested assumption that generated negatives are better than simply using more real negatives. No new physical or conceptual entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Adaptive edge-weight parameter a = learned during training; initialized to 1
    Introduced in Eq. (6) to balance distance and relative velocity when computing graph edge weights. The optimal ratio is unknown, so the model fits it on the training data.
  • Accident probability threshold p_tau = not specified; selected per operating point ('balance' or 'best AP')
    Used in the Methods section to define when an accident is predicted. The paper reports TTA at a threshold that yields the highest AP, so the reported mTTA numbers depend on a test-informed threshold choice.
  • Number of generated negative videos per augmentation level = 300 for AoTA+; 80/160/240/320 for DAD +10/+20/+30/+40%
    The amount of synthetic data added is chosen by hand and directly drives the reported AP gains. The paper does not provide a principled rule for selecting these counts.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Video-LLaVA zero-shot VQA correctly extracts environmental factors (weather, lighting, road state) from dashcam videos.
    Section 'Driving Scene Deconstruction' reports 96.71% day/night and 81.88% weather accuracy on the CCD dataset, but this is a single unverifiable evaluation and the prompt details are not given.
  • domain assumption World Dreamer generates videos whose feature distribution is close enough to real dashcam videos to serve as effective training data.
    Section 'Driving Scene Reconstruction' reports FVD 36.38 on DAD and lists visible artifacts; the usefulness of generated data is the core premise of the augmentation claim.
  • domain assumption ZOEDepth provides metric depth estimates accurate enough for the 3D distance computation in Eq. (5).
    The model's edge weights combine normalized pixel distances with depth differences; if depth is not metric or is noisy, the graph weights are miscalibrated.
  • ad hoc to paper Randomly selecting coordinates from Maryland traffic accident reports yields road networks representative enough to generalize to DAD and other test sets.
    Section 'Locating and route planning' uses only publicly available Maryland accident report coordinates; no evidence is provided that this geographic choice covers the diversity of the evaluation datasets.
  • ad hoc to paper Adding negative (non-accident) synthetic videos is sufficient to improve accident anticipation, without generating positive accident scenes.
    Section 'Driving Scene Generation' explicitly states that only negative traffic scenes are generated, so the framework does not address the shortage of positive accident samples claimed as a motivation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of World Model-Based End-to-End Scene Generation for Accident Anticipation in Autonomous Driving." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JN6PE66A

@misc{pith2026250712762,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: World Model-Based End-to-End Scene Generation for Accident Anticipation in Autonomous Driving},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JN6PE66A}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.12762}
}
read the original abstract

Reliable anticipation of traffic accidents is essential for advancing autonomous driving systems. However, this objective is limited by two fundamental challenges: the scarcity of diverse, high-quality training data and the frequent absence of crucial object-level cues due to environmental disruptions or sensor deficiencies. To tackle these issues, we propose a comprehensive framework combining generative scene augmentation with adaptive temporal reasoning. Specifically, we develop a video generation pipeline that utilizes a world model guided by domain-informed prompts to create high-resolution, statistically consistent driving scenarios, particularly enriching the coverage of edge cases and complex interactions. In parallel, we construct a dynamic prediction model that encodes spatio-temporal relationships through strengthened graph convolutions and dilated temporal operators, effectively addressing data incompleteness and transient visual noise. Furthermore, we release a new benchmark dataset designed to better capture diverse real-world driving risks. Extensive experiments on public and newly released datasets confirm that our framework enhances both the accuracy and lead time of accident anticipation, offering a robust solution to current data and modeling limitations in safety-critical autonomous driving applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.12762 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Driving scene deconstruction and reconstruction diagram. For scene deconstruction, we use a vision-language model (VLM) to extract key domain knowledge through Zero￾shot Visual Question Answering. In the process of scene reconstruction, humans interpret domain knowledge through common sense and imagine the scenes it constitutes . In our framework, a world model replaces the prior knowledge used in the human imaginat… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Driving scenario generation framework. With the world model as the core, it uses scene factors and geographical conditions derived from real world data to generate realistic driving scenarios. All location coordinates are taken from real roadway traffic accident reports to ensure that the high￾definition (HD) map used to generate the video is centered on the road [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Diagram of domain knowledge extraction and consis￾tency check. Additional consistency checks on Vision-language model (VLM) output results through prompt engineering can effectively correct some incorrect answers. Samples that fail the consistency check will be revised through manual review. Considering the critical factors presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison of the environmental factor distribu￾tions of Anticipation of Traffic Accident (AoTA) dataset and Dashcam Accidents Dataset (DAD). The DAD dataset has a larger proportion of environments with good weather and high visibility, while the AoTA dataset is more b…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Examples of generated videos. a Generated video with high-definition (HD) map and bird’s-eye view (BEV). b Generated video with different weather. The step size of World Dreamer is set by taking the FPS of the original video as a reference, the width and height of the …
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Our proposed traffic accident anticipation framework. This framework includes three parts: extracting visual features and depth information from dashcam videos, using dynamic graph neural network (GCN) to model object relationships, and long-term temporal learning. the…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of 2D distance and 3D distance in distance estimation between objects. When use 2D distance, one distance corresponds to multiple positional relationships. After adding depth information to calculate the 3D distance, the positional relationship becomes uniqu…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Distribution of traffic accident start frames in the Anticipation of Traffic Accident (AoTA) dataset. a Histogram showing the frequency of all accident start frames across positive samples in the AoTA dataset. b Violin plots showing the distribution of accident start f…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Visualization of our model performance and comparison with another representative model DSTA. a, b Positive scenarios where our anticipation results differ from those of DSTA. c, d Negative scenarios where our anticipation results differ from those of DSTA. e A scenar…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Autonomous vehicles: challenges, opportunities, and future implications for transportation policies

    Saeed Asadi Bagloee, Madjid Tavana, Mohsen Asadi, and Tracey Oliver. Autonomous vehicles: challenges, opportunities, and future implications for transportation policies. Journal of modern trans- portation, 24:284–303, 2016

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Driving to safety: How many miles of driving would it take to demonstrate autonomous vehicle reliability? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 94:182–193, 2016

    Nidhi Kalra and Susan M Paddock. Driving to safety: How many miles of driving would it take to demonstrate autonomous vehicle reliability? Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 94:182–193, 2016

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Vision- based traffic accident detection and anticipation: A survey.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2023

    Jianwu Fang, Jiahuan Qiao, Jianru Xue, and Zhengguo Li. Vision- based traffic accident detection and anticipation: A survey.IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Dynamicattentionaugmentedgraphnetworkforvideoaccident anticipation

    Wenfeng Song, Shuai Li, Tao Chang, Ke Xie, Aimin Hao, and Hong Qin. Dynamicattentionaugmentedgraphnetworkforvideoaccident anticipation. Pattern Recognition, 147:110071, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Antic- ipating accidents in dashcam videos

    Fu-Hsiang Chan, Yu-Ting Chen, Yu Xiang, and Min Sun. Antic- ipating accidents in dashcam videos. In Computer Vision–ACCV 2016: 13th Asian Conference on Computer Vision, Taipei, Taiwan, November 20-24, 2016, Revised Selected Papers, Part IV 13, pages 136–153. Springer, 2017

    work page 2016

  6. [6]

    A dynamic spatial-temporal attention network for early anticipation of traffic accidents.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(7):9590–9600, 2022

    MuhammadMonjurulKarim,YuLi,RuwenQin,andZhaozhengYin. A dynamic spatial-temporal attention network for early anticipation of traffic accidents.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(7):9590–9600, 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Spatiotemporal scene-graph embedding for autonomous vehicle collision prediction

    Arnav Vaibhav Malawade, Shih-Yuan Yu, Brandon Hsu, Deepan Muthirayan, Pramod P Khargonekar, and Mohammad Abdullah Al Faruque. Spatiotemporal scene-graph embedding for autonomous vehicle collision prediction. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 9(12):9379–9388, 2022

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Global feature aggregation for accident anticipation

    Mishal Fatima, Muhammad Umar Karim Khan, and Chong-Min Kyung. Global feature aggregation for accident anticipation. In2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), pages 2809–2816. IEEE, 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    Scene-graph augmented data-driven risk assessment of autonomous vehicle decisions

    Shih-Yuan Yu, Arnav Vaibhav Malawade, Deepan Muthirayan, Pramod P Khargonekar, and Mohammad Abdullah Al Faruque. Scene-graph augmented data-driven risk assessment of autonomous vehicle decisions. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(7):7941–7951, 2021

    2021

  2. [10]

    That-net: Two-layer hidden state aggregation based two-stream net- work for traffic accident prediction.Information Sciences, 634:744– 760, 2023

    Wei Liu, Tao Zhang, Yisheng Lu, Jun Chen, and Longsheng Wei. That-net: Two-layer hidden state aggregation based two-stream net- work for traffic accident prediction.Information Sciences, 634:744– 760, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    When, where, and what? a benchmark for accident anticipation and localization with large language models

    Haicheng Liao, Yongkang Li, Chengyue Wang, Yanchen Guan, Ka- hou Tam, Chunlin Tian, Li Li, Chengzhong Xu, and Zhenning Li. When, where, and what? a benchmark for accident anticipation and localization with large language models. InProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conf...

    2024

  4. [12]

    Review of graph-based hazardous event detection methods for autonomous driving systems

    Dannier Xiao, Mehrdad Dianati, William Gonçalves Geiger, and Roger Woodman. Review of graph-based hazardous event detection methods for autonomous driving systems. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 24(5):4697–4715, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Graph (graph): A nested graph-based framework for early accident antic- ipation

    Nupur Thakur, PrasanthSai Gouripeddi, and Baoxin Li. Graph (graph): A nested graph-based framework for early accident antic- ipation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pages 7533–7541, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Latte: A real-time lightweight attention-based traffic accident anticipation engine

    Jiaxun Zhang, Yanchen Guan, Chengyue Wang, Haicheng Liao, Guohui Zhang, and Zhenning Li. Latte: A real-time lightweight attention-based traffic accident anticipation engine. Information Fusion, 122:103173, 2025

    2025

  7. [15]

    Crash: Crash recognition and anticipation system harnessing with context-aware and temporal focus attentions

    HaichengLiao,HaoyuSun,HuanmingShen,ChengyueWang,Chun- lin Tian, KaHou Tam, Li Li, Chengzhong Xu, and Zhenning Li. Crash: Crash recognition and anticipation system harnessing with context-aware and temporal focus attentions. InProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conferenc...

    2024

  8. [16]

    Real-time acci- dent anticipation for autonomous driving through monocular depth- enhanced3dmodeling

    HaichengLiao,YongkangLi,ZhenningLi,ZilinBian,JaeyoungLee, Zhiyong Cui, Guohui Zhang, and Chengzhong Xu. Real-time acci- dent anticipation for autonomous driving through monocular depth- enhanced3dmodeling. AccidentAnalysis&Prevention ,207:107760, 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    Dc-gaussian: Improving3dgaussiansplattingforreflectivedashcamvideos

    Linhan Wang, Kai Cheng, Shuo Lei, Shengkun Wang, Wei Yin, Chenyang Lei, Xiaoxiao Long, and Chang-Tien Lu. Dc-gaussian: Improving3dgaussiansplattingforreflectivedashcamvideos. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17705, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Reflection removal under fast forward camera motion.IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 26(12):6061–6073, 2017

    Jun Young Cheong, Christian Simon, Chang-Su Kim, and In Kyu Park. Reflection removal under fast forward camera motion.IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 26(12):6061–6073, 2017

    2017

  11. [19]

    Real-time automatic traffic accident recognition using hfg

    Samy Sadeky, Ayoub Al-Hamadiy, Bernd Michaelisy, and Usama Sayed. Real-time automatic traffic accident recognition using hfg. In201020thInternationalConferenceonPatternRecognition ,pages 3348–3351. IEEE, 2010

    2010

  12. [20]

    Unsupervisedtrafficaccidentdetectioninfirst-personvideos

    Yu Yao, Mingze Xu, Yuchen Wang, David J Crandall, and Ella M Atkins. Unsupervisedtrafficaccidentdetectioninfirst-personvideos. In2019IEEE/RSJInternationalConferenceonIntelligentRobotsand Systems (IROS), pages 273–280. IEEE, 2019

    2019

  13. [21]

    IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 9(1):2249–2261, 2023

    Tianhang Wang, Kai Chen, Guang Chen, Bin Li, Zhijun Li, Zhengfa Liu,andChangjunJiang.Gsc:Agraphandspatio-temporalcontinuity based framework for accident anticipation. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 9(1):2249–2261, 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding

    JacobDevlin,Ming-WeiChang,KentonLee,andKristinaToutanova. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. In Proceedings of the 2019 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics: human language tech...

    2019

  15. [23]

    Vision- language models for vision tasks: A survey.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    Jingyi Zhang, Jiaxing Huang, Sheng Jin, and Shijian Lu. Vision- language models for vision tasks: A survey.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Learning transferable visual mod- elsfromnaturallanguagesupervision

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, et al. Learning transferable visual mod- elsfromnaturallanguagesupervision. In Internationalconferenceon machine learning, pages ...

    2021

  17. [25]

    Sun database: Large-scale scene recognition from abbeytozoo

    Jianxiong Xiao, James Hays, Krista A Ehinger, Aude Oliva, and Antonio Torralba. Sun database: Large-scale scene recognition from abbeytozoo. In 2010IEEEcomputersocietyconferenceoncomputer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3485–3492. IEEE, 2010

    2010

  18. [26]

    Enhancing vision-language models with scene graphs for traffic accident understanding

    AaronLohner,FrancescoCompagno,JonathanFrancis,andAlessan- dro Oltramari. Enhancing vision-language models with scene graphs for traffic accident understanding. In2024 IEEE International Au- tomated Vehicle Validation Conference (IAVVC), pages 1–7. IEEE, 2024

    2024

  19. [27]

    Cross-domain traffic scene understanding by integrating deep learn- ing and topic model.Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022(1):8884669, 2022

    YuanfengYang,HushengDong,GangLiu,LiangZhang,andLinLi. Cross-domain traffic scene understanding by integrating deep learn- ing and topic model.Computational intelligence and neuroscience, 2022(1):8884669, 2022

    2022

  20. [28]

    World models for autonomous driving: An initial survey.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 2024

    Yanchen Guan, Haicheng Liao, Zhenning Li, Jia Hu, Runze Yuan, Yunjian Li, Guohui Zhang, and Chengzhong Xu. World models for autonomous driving: An initial survey.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Gaia-1: A generative world model for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17080, 2023

    Anthony Hu, Lloyd Russell, Hudson Yeo, Zak Murez, George Fe- doseev,AlexKendall,JamieShotton,andGianlucaCorrado. Gaia-1: A generative world model for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.17080, 2023. Yanchen Guan et al.:Preprint submitted to Elsevier Page 11 of 13 Data...

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Driving into the future: Multiview visual fore- casting and planning with world model for autonomous driving

    Yuqi Wang, Jiawei He, Lue Fan, Hongxin Li, Yuntao Chen, and Zhaoxiang Zhang. Driving into the future: Multiview visual fore- casting and planning with world model for autonomous driving. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, page...

    2024

  23. [31]

    Vista:Ageneralizable driving world model with high fidelity and versatile controllability

    Shenyuan Gao, Jiazhi Yang, Li Chen, Kashyap Chitta, Yihang Qiu, AndreasGeiger,JunZhang,andHongyangLi. Vista:Ageneralizable driving world model with high fidelity and versatile controllability. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17398, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Sora: A review on background, technology, limitations, and opportunities of large vision models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.17177, 2024

    YixinLiu,KaiZhang,YuanLi,ZhilingYan,ChujieGao,RuoxiChen, Zhengqing Yuan, Yue Huang, Hanchi Sun, Jianfeng Gao, et al. Sora: A review on background, technology, limitations, and opportunities of large vision models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.17177, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Drivearena: A closed-loop generative simulation platform for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00415, 2024

    Xuemeng Yang, Licheng Wen, Yukai Ma, Jianbiao Mei, Xin Li, Tiantian Wei, Wenjie Lei, Daocheng Fu, Pinlong Cai, Min Dou, et al. Drivearena: A closed-loop generative simulation platform for autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.00415, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Recurrentworldmodelsfacilitate policyevolution

    DavidHaandJürgenSchmidhuber. Recurrentworldmodelsfacilitate policyevolution. Advancesinneuralinformationprocessingsystems , 31, 2018

    2018

  27. [35]

    Mastering atari with discrete world models

    Danijar Hafner, Timothy Lillicrap, Mohammad Norouzi, and Jimmy Ba. Mastering atari with discrete world models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02193, 2020

    2010 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Video-llava: Learning united visual representation by alignmentbeforeprojection

    Bin Lin, Yang Ye, Bin Zhu, Jiaxi Cui, Munan Ning, Peng Jin, and Li Yuan. Video-llava: Learning united visual representation by alignmentbeforeprojection. arXivpreprintarXiv:2311.10122 ,2023

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Openstreetmap: User- generatedstreetmaps

    Mordechai Haklay and Patrick Weber. Openstreetmap: User- generatedstreetmaps. IEEEPervasivecomputing ,7(4):12–18,2008

    2008

  30. [38]

    Recent development and applications of sumo-simulation of urban mobility

    Daniel Krajzewicz, Jakob Erdmann, Michael Behrisch, and Laura Bieker. Recent development and applications of sumo-simulation of urban mobility. International journal on advances in systems and measurements, 5(3&4), 2012

    2012

  31. [39]

    Planning-oriented autonomous driving

    Yihan Hu, Jiazhi Yang, Li Chen, Keyu Li, Chonghao Sima, Xizhou Zhu, Siqi Chai, Senyao Du, Tianwei Lin, Wenhai Wang, et al. Planning-oriented autonomous driving. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVFConferenceonComputerVisionandPatternRecognition , pages 17853–17862, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomousdriving

    Holger Caesar, Varun Bankiti, Alex H Lang, Sourabh Vora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Giancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom. nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomousdriving. In ProceedingsoftheIEEE/CVFconferenceon computer vision and pattern recognit...

    2020

  33. [41]

    High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

    RobinRombach,AndreasBlattmann,DominikLorenz,PatrickEsser, and Björn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 10684–10695, 2022

    2022

  34. [42]

    Worlddreamer: Towards general world models for video generation via predicting masked tokens.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.09985, 2024

    Xiaofeng Wang, Zheng Zhu, Guan Huang, Boyuan Wang, Xinze Chen, and Jiwen Lu. Worlddreamer: Towards general world models for video generation via predicting masked tokens.arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.09985, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Fvd: A new metric for video generation

    Thomas Unterthiner, Sjoerd Van Steenkiste, Karol Kurach, Raphaël Marinier, Marcin Michalski, and Sylvain Gelly. Fvd: A new metric for video generation

  36. [44]

    Frechetinceptiondistance(fid) for evaluating gans.China University of Mining Technology Beijing Graduate School, 3(11), 2021

    YuYu,WeibinZhang,andYunDeng. Frechetinceptiondistance(fid) for evaluating gans.China University of Mining Technology Beijing Graduate School, 3(11), 2021

    2021

  37. [45]

    Nms strikes back

    Jeffrey Ouyang-Zhang, Jang Hyun Cho, Xingyi Zhou, and Philipp Krähenbühl. Nms strikes back. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.06137, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Very deep convolu- tional networks for large-scale image recognition

    Karen Simonyan and Andrew Zisserman. Very deep convolu- tional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:1409.1556, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Zoedepth: Zero-shot transfer by combining relative and metric depth.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.12288, 2023

    Shariq Farooq Bhat, Reiner Birkl, Diana Wofk, Peter Wonka, and Matthias Müller. Zoedepth: Zero-shot transfer by combining relative and metric depth.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.12288, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3061–3070, 2015

    MoritzMenzeandAndreasGeiger.Objectsceneflowforautonomous vehicles. InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3061–3070, 2015

    2015

  41. [49]

    Long short-term memory.Neural Computation MIT- Press, 1997

    S Hochreiter. Long short-term memory.Neural Computation MIT- Press, 1997

    1997

  42. [50]

    Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on sequence modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.3555, 2014

    Junyoung Chung, Caglar Gulcehre, KyungHyun Cho, and Yoshua Bengio. Empirical evaluation of gated recurrent neural networks on sequence modeling.arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.3555, 2014

    2014 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Temporal convolutional networks for action segmen- tation and detection

    Colin Lea, Michael D Flynn, Rene Vidal, Austin Reiter, and Gre- gory D Hager. Temporal convolutional networks for action segmen- tation and detection. In proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 156–165, 2017

    2017

  44. [52]

    Multi-scalecontextaggregationbydilatedconvolutions

    FYu. Multi-scalecontextaggregationbydilatedconvolutions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.07122, 2015

    2015 arXiv

  45. [53]

    IEEEtransactionsonpatternanalysisandmachine intelligence, 45(1):444–459, 2022

    YuYao,XiziWang,MingzeXu,ZelinPu,YuchenWang,EllaAtkins, andDavidJCrandall.Dota:Unsuperviseddetectionoftrafficanomaly indrivingvideos. IEEEtransactionsonpatternanalysisandmachine intelligence, 45(1):444–459, 2022

    2022

  46. [54]

    Bdd100k: A diverse driving dataset for heterogeneous multitask learning

    Fisher Yu, Haofeng Chen, Xin Wang, Wenqi Xian, Yingying Chen, Fangchen Liu, Vashisht Madhavan, and Trevor Darrell. Bdd100k: A diverse driving dataset for heterogeneous multitask learning. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pag...

    2020

  47. [55]

    Uncertainty-basedtrafficaccident anticipation with spatio-temporal relational learning

    WentaoBao,QiYu,andYuKong. Uncertainty-basedtrafficaccident anticipation with spatio-temporal relational learning. InACM Multi- media Conference, May 2020

    2020

  48. [56]

    A review onthelongshort-termmemorymodel

    Greg Van Houdt, Carlos Mosquera, and Gonzalo Nápoles. A review onthelongshort-termmemorymodel. ArtificialIntelligenceReview , 53(8):5929–5955, 2020

    2020

  49. [57]

    At- tention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    AshishVaswani,NoamShazeer,NikiParmar,JakobUszkoreit,Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Łukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. At- tention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    2017

  50. [58]

    An empirical eval- uation of generic convolutional and recurrent networks for sequence modeling

    Shaojie Bai, J Zico Kolter, and Vladlen Koltun. An empirical eval- uation of generic convolutional and recurrent networks for sequence modeling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.01271, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  51. [59]

    In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3521–3529, 2018

    Tomoyuki Suzuki, Hirokatsu Kataoka, Yoshimitsu Aoki, and Yutaka Satoh.Anticipatingtrafficaccidentswithadaptivelossandlarge-scale incident db. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 3521–3529, 2018

    2018

  52. [60]

    A multi- modal architecture with spatio-temporal-text adaptation for video- basedtrafficaccidentanticipation

    Patrik Patera, Yie-Tarng Chen, and Wen-Hsien Fang. A multi- modal architecture with spatio-temporal-text adaptation for video- basedtrafficaccidentanticipation. IEEETransactionsonCircuitsand Systems for Video Technology, 2025. Yanchen Guan et al.:Preprint submitted to Elsevier...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.