*November 2019*

tl;dr: One of the first paper to introduce epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty in object detection.

This paper has a good level of details regarding how to adapt aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty to object detector.

**Modeling aleatoric uncertainty boosted the performance (by 1-5%). Modeling epistemic uncertainty via monte carlo dropout degrades performance slightly.** –> also observed by Bayesian yolov3.

This paper only models aleatoric uncertainty in FRH (faster rcnn head) part. This work is extended by towards safe ad2 by modeling uncertainty in both RPN and FRH.

Uncertainty can be used to efficiently improve the vehicle detector in an active learning paradigm: the detector actively queries the unseen samples with high epistemic uncertainty.

- Vehicle probability and
**epistemic**classification uncertainty: N forward passes yields s_i (i=1,…,N) (N=40 in this paper)- proba: \(\frac{1}{N} \sum_i s_i\)
- SE (Shannon entropy): \(SE = -(\frac{1}{N}\sum_i s_i) \log (\frac{1}{N} \sum_i s_i) - (1-\frac{1}{N} \sum_i s_i) \log(1-\frac{1}{N} \sum_i s_i)\) Note that this only depends on the average score
- MI (mutual information) \(MI = -(\frac{1}{N} \sum_i s_i) \log (\frac{1}{N}\sum_i s_i) + \frac{1}{N}\sum_i (s_i \log s_i + (1-s_i)\log(1-s_i))\)

- classification
**aleatoric**uncertainty: not implemented - 3D bbox and
**epistemic**spatial uncertainty- Mean \(I=\frac{1}{N} \sum_i v_i\)
- epistemic uncertainty in terms of total variance \(C(x)=\frac{1}{N}\sum_i v_x v_x^T - I_x I_x^T\) \(TV(x) = trace(C(x))\)

- 3D bbox
**aleatoric**uncertainty- directly regress as additional number (uncertainty aware L1/L2 loss, similar to KL loss) \(L = e^{-\lambda} ||v_{gt} - v_{pred}|| + \lambda\)
- the covariance matrix of the Gaussian multivariate is diagonal.

- MI/SE both correlates well with IoU (prediction quality) –> this is interesting, cf IoU Net. Maybe plotting the average in IoU will also reveal similar trends in IoU Net.
- TV/
**epistemic**uncertainty decreases for higher IoU. Aleatoric uncertainty also goes down but not as much with prediction quality. –> cf bayesian yolov3 from the same authors. - The aleatoric uncertainty is positively correlated with
**distance**. A more distant object is more difficult to localize, due to more sparse measurement. The same holds true for**occluded**ones.

- Faster RCNN for BEV detection (with 0.1 m as a pixel) + fixed height to lift to 3D
- 3D bbox representation: 24 numbers of the 8 corners of 3d bbox, corner loss of distance from the ground truth, normalized by diagonal distance.

Knowing what an object detection model is unsure about is of paramount importance for safe autonomous driving. Most Object detection can only tell the human drivers what they have seen, but not how certain they are about it. Detecting an abnormal object that is different from the training dataset may result in high epistemic uncertainty, while detecting a distant/occluded object may result in high aleatoric uncertainty.

- Towards faster estimation of epistemic uncertainty, we can cache the feature map from the backbone and perform several forward pass only on the last FC layers.
- Before we change our object detector to a probabilistic one, how good is the correlation between cls score and IoU? And evaluate this again after modeling aleatoric.