2010
DOI: 10.1109/mvt.2010.939109
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Highway Toll Enforcement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(Urazghildiiev, Ragnarsson, Ridderstrom, Rydberg, Ojefors, Wallin, Enochsson, Ericson, & Lofqvist, 2007) proposes an AVC system capable of classifying 6 different vehicle types using geometrical features and probabilistic classifier engine; the authors report an average classification rate of 83.6%. (Stroffek, Kuriscak & Marsalek, 2010) is another case of AVC system implemented using geometrical features and a neural network as classifier engine; here, the authors report a classification rate of 94.31%, however they do not mention how many types of vehicles this system can classify. (Sandhawalia, Rodriguez-Serrano, Poirier & Csurka, 2013) proposes a comparison between three different features but using a linear classifier engine; this work reports the following classification rates for each type of feature: Raw Profiles Features 79.93%, Fisher Laser Signatures 70.52%, and Fisher Image Signatures 83.04%.…”
Section: Classification Resultsmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…(Urazghildiiev, Ragnarsson, Ridderstrom, Rydberg, Ojefors, Wallin, Enochsson, Ericson, & Lofqvist, 2007) proposes an AVC system capable of classifying 6 different vehicle types using geometrical features and probabilistic classifier engine; the authors report an average classification rate of 83.6%. (Stroffek, Kuriscak & Marsalek, 2010) is another case of AVC system implemented using geometrical features and a neural network as classifier engine; here, the authors report a classification rate of 94.31%, however they do not mention how many types of vehicles this system can classify. (Sandhawalia, Rodriguez-Serrano, Poirier & Csurka, 2013) proposes a comparison between three different features but using a linear classifier engine; this work reports the following classification rates for each type of feature: Raw Profiles Features 79.93%, Fisher Laser Signatures 70.52%, and Fisher Image Signatures 83.04%.…”
Section: Classification Resultsmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…From 2000 onwards, any reference to applications of ANN algorithms was regarded as a standard computational method, as it can be seen in a vast number of examples in technical and scientific computing [44].…”
Section: Network Of Self-organizing Maps and Other Unsupervised Netwmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The task is accomplished by a three layer feed-forward ANN. The use of the ANN enables to combine both vehicle shape recognition and classification into one algorithm [44].…”
Section: Future Perspectives Of Annmentioning
confidence: 99%