Multi-Sensor Fusion Training for Robust Object Detection and Motion Prediction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous systems face challenges in robust object detection and motion prediction due to increased system complexity and brittleness, particularly when relying on multiple sensor modalities, which can lead to over-reliance on specific sensors and difficulties in handling sensor noise and the realism gap between simulated and real-world data.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a computing system that uses sensor dropout during training to mitigate these issues, allowing for more robust models that can jointly detect and predict objects using LIDAR point clouds, camera RGB images, and RADAR returns, thereby reducing reliance on individual sensors and improving generalization performance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If multiple sensor modalities are used for object detection and motion prediction, then sensing performance and coverage are improved, but system complexity and model brittleness increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveobject detection performanceVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically selects and weights different sensor modalities based on current operational conditions and data quality. The neural network adaptively adjusts which sensors to trust and how much weight to give each modality, transforming a static multi-sensor system into a dynamic one that can handle complexity by being flexible rather than rigid in its sensor integration approach.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If multiple sensor modalities are integrated, then sensing coverage is improved, but model brittleness and over-reliance on specific sensors occur

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesensing coverageVSAvoidmodel robustness
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system changes the parameters of sensor integration by using learnable weighting mechanisms and dropout techniques. During training, sensor inputs are randomly dropped to prevent over-reliance on any single modality. During operation, the system dynamically adjusts sensor weighting based on data quality metrics and environmental conditions, making the model adaptable rather than brittle.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary actions during the training phase by exposing the neural network to degraded sensor inputs through dropout techniques. This preliminary training with incomplete or noisy data prepares the model to handle real-world sensor failures and variations, preventing brittleness before deployment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Measurement precision

If all sensors are required to be available at all times, then detection accuracy is maintained, but computing resources are wasted

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidcomputing resource usage
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial action by selectively processing only the most relevant sensor modalities for each detection task rather than uniformly processing all sensors. The neural network can choose to rely on subsets of sensors based on current needs, performing exactly enough sensing and processing to maintain accuracy without the excessive computation of always using all available sensors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

4Adaptability or versatility

If sensor dropout is applied during training, then model generalization is improved, but training complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeneralization performanceVSAvoidtraining complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system converts the potential harm of sensor dropout (which could degrade performance) into a benefit by using it as a training technique. By deliberately introducing sensor failures during training, the model learns to be more robust and generalize better to real-world conditions where sensors may fail or provide noisy data, turning a negative into a positive training strategy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #22Blessing in disguise (Convert harm into benefit)

Data Source

PatentUS12007728B1Systems and methods for sensor data processing and object detection and motion prediction for robotic platforms
Publication Date: 2024.06.11 AURORA OPERATIONS INC
  • US12007728B1 patent drawing
  • US12007728B1 patent drawing
  • US12007728B1 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods are disclosed for detecting and predicting the motion of objects within the surrounding environment of a system such as an autonomous vehicle. For example, an autonomous vehicle can obtain sensor data from a plurality of sensors comprising at least two different sensor modalities (e.g., RADAR, LIDAR, camera) and fused together to create a fused sensor sample. The fused sensor sample can then be provided as input to a machine learning model (e.g., a machine learning model for object detection and/or motion prediction). The machine learning model can have been trained by independently applying sensor dropout to the at least two different sensor modalities. Outputs received from the machine learning model in response to receipt of the fused sensor samples are characterized by improved generalization performance over multiple sensor modalities, thus yielding improved performance in detecting objects and predicting their future locations, as well as improved navigation performance.