Refine
Departments, institutes and facilities
Document Type
- Article (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3)
Keywords
- deep learning (3) (remove)
A company's financial documents use tables along with text to organize the data containing key performance indicators (KPIs) (such as profit and loss) and a financial quantity linked to them. The KPI’s linked quantity in a table might not be equal to the similarly described KPI's quantity in a text. Auditors take substantial time to manually audit these financial mistakes and this process is called consistency checking. As compared to existing work, this paper attempts to automate this task with the help of transformer-based models. Furthermore, for consistency checking it is essential for the table's KPIs embeddings to encode the semantic knowledge of the KPIs and the structural knowledge of the table. Therefore, this paper proposes a pipeline that uses a tabular model to get the table's KPIs embeddings. The pipeline takes input table and text KPIs, generates their embeddings, and then checks whether these KPIs are identical. The pipeline is evaluated on the financial documents in the German language and a comparative analysis of the cell embeddings' quality from the three tabular models is also presented. From the evaluation results, the experiment that used the English-translated text and table KPIs and Tabbie model to generate table KPIs’ embeddings achieved an accuracy of 72.81% on the consistency checking task, outperforming the benchmark, and other tabular models.
It is only a matter of time until autonomous vehicles become ubiquitous; however, human driving supervision will remain a necessity for decades. To assess the drive's ability to take control over the vehicle in critical scenarios, driver distractions can be monitored using wearable sensors or sensors that are embedded in the vehicle, such as video cameras. The types of driving distractions that can be sensed with various sensors is an open research question that this study attempts to answer. This study compared data from physiological sensors (palm electrodermal activity (pEDA), heart rate and breathing rate) and visual sensors (eye tracking, pupil diameter, nasal EDA (nEDA), emotional activation and facial action units (AUs)) for the detection of four types of distractions. The dataset was collected in a previous driving simulation study. The statistical tests showed that the most informative feature/modality for detecting driver distraction depends on the type of distraction, with emotional activation and AUs being the most promising. The experimental comparison of seven classical machine learning (ML) and seven end-to-end deep learning (DL) methods, which were evaluated on a separate test set of 10 subjects, showed that when classifying windows into distracted or not distracted, the highest F1-score of 79%; was realized by the extreme gradient boosting (XGB) classifier using 60-second windows of AUs as input. When classifying complete driving sessions, XGB's F1-score was 94%. The best-performing DL model was a spectro-temporal ResNet, which realized an F1-score of 75%; when classifying segments and an F1-score of 87%; when classifying complete driving sessions. Finally, this study identified and discussed problems, such as label jitter, scenario overfitting and unsatisfactory generalization performance, that may adversely affect related ML approaches.