发现驾驶轨迹预测的采样频率影响模型性能,低频有时比高频更好。
Temporal Sampling Frequency Matters: A Capacity-Aware Study of End-to-End Driving Trajectory Prediction

- 通过降采样构建不同频率数据集,研究采样率对模型表现的影响。
- 小模型在中低频下表现更优,大模型则需高频数据才能发挥最佳性能。
- 建议报告并调优采样频率,而非默认使用最高频率。
端到端自动驾驶轨迹预测通常以最高可用帧率采样摄像头帧,假设更密集的采样能提升性能。本文将时间采样频率视为显式训练集设计变量,从高帧率端到端驾驶数据集出发,沿每条轨迹进行时序降采样构建频率扫描训练集。对每个模型-数据集组合,在固定训练协议下训练与评估相同模型,以分析性能随采样频率的变化。从容量感知视角分析:稀疏采样可能遗漏驾驶相关线索,密集采样则引入冗余视觉内容及非流形噪声,对有限容量模型造成无关容量负担。在Waymo、nuScenes和PAVE数据集上评估三个小型端到端模型和一个大型VLA风格AutoVLA模型。结果表明模型与数据集依赖的频率响应:小模型常呈现非单调或近似平台趋势,其3秒ADE最佳值出现在较低或中间频率;而AutoVLA在所有数据集上均在最高测试频率下取得最优3秒ADE与FDE。迭代匹配对照实验表明,小模型在低/中频优势并非仅由训练更新次数差异解释。研究结论指出,时间采样频率应被报告并调优,而非固定为最高可用值。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
End to end (E2E) autonomous driving trajectory prediction is often trained with camera frames sampled at the highest available temporal frequency, assuming that denser sampling improves performance. We question this assumption by treating temporal sampling frequency as an explicit training set design variable. Starting from high frequency E2E driving datasets, we construct frequency sweep training sets by temporally subsampling camera frames along each trajectory. For each model dataset pair, we train and evaluate the same model under a fixed protocol, so the frequency response reflects how prediction performance changes with sampling frequency. We analyze this response from a capacity aware perspective. Sparse sampling may miss driving relevant cues, while dense sampling may add redundant visual content and off manifold noise. For finite capacity models, this can create a driving irrelevant capacity burden. We evaluate three smaller E2E models and a larger VLA style AutoVLA model on Waymo, nuScenes, and PAVE. Results show model and dataset dependent frequency responses. Smaller E2E models often show non monotonic or near plateau trends and achieve their best 3 second ADE at lower or intermediate frequencies. In contrast, AutoVLA achieves its best 3 second ADE and FDE at the highest evaluated frequency on all three datasets. Iteration matched controls suggest that the advantage of lower or intermediate frequencies for smaller models is not explained only by unequal training update counts. These findings show that temporal sampling frequency should be reported and tuned, rather than fixed to the highest available value.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。