It appears in their paper that they had many such natural driving conditions in their 1200 mile dataset, and that is why their accuracy in prediction is about 80%. Their machine learning algorithm learns to predict from such noisy observations.
Please see the last part of the video, where the positions of the humans changes. The full research paper describes scenarios in which the planner has to plan in new settings.
Hyper dimensional dreams:
I had dreamt in weird spaces, when I was down with heavy fever. There was less of a concept of space-time, but a weird tunnels and stuff...
Atleast in some fields, such as many areas of computer science, this war can be said to have been won by scientists over publishers. In these fields, a publication in a conference is atleast as reputed (sometimes more reputed) than publishing in a journal. The copyrights are, in many cases, free, or atleast the author can post it on their website.
In my research group (computer science-AI), we strongly prefer not to publish in journals/conferences that do not allow free access to the papers. Atleast in my area, there is fair competition among publishers, i.e., there are more than one almost-equal-valued journal/conferences. Therefore, you have a choice to send it off to a journal with less restrictive publication policies. In fact, as a matter of principle, I send it to the journal with free online access even if it has slightly worse reputation than the one charging for it.
Well. It is not as clear cut usually as you suggest.
There are many toolkits (i.e., software) that one ends up using for a peer-reviewed publication that are often not cited. (E.g., an optimization software.) Perhaps, the authors want to force people to cite their use of software in those cases.
Hmm, the directory dump shows I've used about 50 GB of space and still have an year of PhD left. I think you're not counting in the inflatory growth of data and decrease in the cost of storing. The 1 million cost quoted for 5000 people was perhaps what would have costed in the last 5 years.
Slashdot Mirror
It appears in their paper that they had many such natural driving conditions in their 1200 mile dataset, and that is why their accuracy in prediction is about 80%. Their machine learning algorithm learns to predict from such noisy observations.
Please see the last part of the video, where the positions of the humans changes. The full research paper describes scenarios in which the planner has to plan in new settings.
Hyper dimensional dreams: I had dreamt in weird spaces, when I was down with heavy fever. There was less of a concept of space-time, but a weird tunnels and stuff...
Atleast in some fields, such as many areas of computer science, this war can be said to have been won by scientists over publishers. In these fields, a publication in a conference is atleast as reputed (sometimes more reputed) than publishing in a journal. The copyrights are, in many cases, free, or atleast the author can post it on their website.
In my research group (computer science-AI), we strongly prefer not to publish in journals/conferences that do not allow free access to the papers. Atleast in my area, there is fair competition among publishers, i.e., there are more than one almost-equal-valued journal/conferences. Therefore, you have a choice to send it off to a journal with less restrictive publication policies. In fact, as a matter of principle, I send it to the journal with free online access even if it has slightly worse reputation than the one charging for it.
I love my Nokia N95 --- nothing beats its amazing camera!
Well. It is not as clear cut usually as you suggest. There are many toolkits (i.e., software) that one ends up using for a peer-reviewed publication that are often not cited. (E.g., an optimization software.) Perhaps, the authors want to force people to cite their use of software in those cases.
Hmm, the directory dump shows I've used about 50 GB of space and still have an year of PhD left. I think you're not counting in the inflatory growth of data and decrease in the cost of storing. The 1 million cost quoted for 5000 people was perhaps what would have costed in the last 5 years.
Canoma was manual process. This aoftware is completely automatic.
http://cs.stanford.edu/people/asaxena/make3d/