Goto

Collaborating Authors

 Jiang, Yuyang


RFPPO: Motion Dynamic RRT based Fluid Field - PPO for Dynamic TF/TA Routing Planning

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

Existing local dynamic route planning algorithms, when directly applied to terrain following/terrain avoidance, or dynamic obstacle avoidance for large and medium-sized fixed-wing aircraft, fail to simultaneously meet the requirements of real-time performance, long-distance planning, and the dynamic constraints of large and medium-sized aircraft. To deal with this issue, this paper proposes the Motion Dynamic RRT based Fluid Field - PPO for dynamic TF/TA routing planning. Firstly, the action and state spaces of the proximal policy gradient algorithm are redesigned using disturbance flow fields and artificial potential field algorithms, establishing an aircraft dynamics model, and designing a state transition process based on this model. Additionally, a reward function is designed to encourage strategies for obstacle avoidance, terrain following, terrain avoidance, and safe flight. Experimental results on real DEM data demonstrate that our algorithm can complete long-distance flight tasks through collision-free trajectory planning that complies with dynamic constraints, without the need for prior global planning.


GPT-4V Cannot Generate Radiology Reports Yet

arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence

GPT-4V's purported strong multimodal abilities raise interests in using it to automate radiology report writing, but there lacks thorough evaluations. In this work, we perform a systematic evaluation of GPT-4V in generating radiology reports on two chest X-ray report datasets: MIMIC-CXR and IU X-Ray. We attempt to directly generate reports using GPT-4V through different prompting strategies and find that it fails terribly in both lexical metrics and clinical efficacy metrics. To understand the low performance, we decompose the task into two steps: 1) the medical image reasoning step of predicting medical condition labels from images; and 2) the report synthesis step of generating reports from (groundtruth) conditions. We show that GPT-4V's performance in image reasoning is consistently low across different prompts. In fact, the distributions of model-predicted labels remain constant regardless of which groundtruth conditions are present on the image, suggesting that the model is not interpreting chest X-rays meaningfully. Even when given groundtruth conditions in report synthesis, its generated reports are less correct and less natural-sounding than a finetuned LLaMA-2. Altogether, our findings cast doubt on the viability of using GPT-4V in a radiology workflow.