Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Konyul Park
dblp:334/3868
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-author · 3 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
3 papers |
3D vision · 54% Robot navigation and mapping · 19% Trustworthy machine learning · 15% |
Topics — the 12 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Computer vision › 3D vision
3d object detection |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Resilient Sensor Fusion Under Adverse Sensor Failures via Multi-Modal Expert Fusion · CVPR 2025 Fine-Grained Pillar Feature Encoding Via Spatio-Temporal Virtual Grid for 3D Object Detection · ICRA 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Layer-Wise Modality Decomposition for Interpretable Multimodal Sensor Fusion · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computer vision › 3D vision › multimodal perception
LiDAR-camera fusion |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Resilient Sensor Fusion Under Adverse Sensor Failures via Multi-Modal Expert Fusion · CVPR 2025 |
Computer vision › 3D vision
multimodal perception |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Layer-Wise Modality Decomposition for Interpretable Multimodal Sensor Fusion · NeurIPS 2025 |
Robotics › Autonomous driving
perception |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Resilient Sensor Fusion Under Adverse Sensor Failures via Multi-Modal Expert Fusion · CVPR 2025 |
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping › sensor fusion
robust sensor fusion |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Resilient Sensor Fusion Under Adverse Sensor Failures via Multi-Modal Expert Fusion · CVPR 2025 |
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping
sensor fusion |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Layer-Wise Modality Decomposition for Interpretable Multimodal Sensor Fusion · NeurIPS 2025 |
Computer vision › 3D vision › 3d object detection › point cloud object detection
LiDAR-based 3D object detection |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Fine-Grained Pillar Feature Encoding Via Spatio-Temporal Virtual Grid for 3D Object Detection · ICRA 2024 |
Computer vision › 3D vision › 3d object detection › point cloud object detection
pillar-based 3d object detection |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Fine-Grained Pillar Feature Encoding Via Spatio-Temporal Virtual Grid for 3D Object Detection · ICRA 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Resilient Sensor Fusion Under Adverse Sensor Failures via Multi-Modal Expert Fusion · CVPR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › fault tolerance
sensor failure robustness |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Resilient Sensor Fusion Under Adverse Sensor Failures via Multi-Modal Expert Fusion · CVPR 2025 |
Robotics › Autonomous driving › perception › environment perception
perception for self-driving vehicles |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Fine-Grained Pillar Feature Encoding Via Spatio-Temporal Virtual Grid for 3D Object Detection · ICRA 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
perturbation-based evaluation · 0.9multi-expert decoding · 0.9mixture of experts · 0.9layer-wise decomposition · 0.9adaptive query routing · 0.9spatio-temporal virtual grid · 0.8convolutional neural network · 0.8attentive pillar aggregation · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Resilient Sensor Fusion Under Adverse Sensor Failures via Multi-Modal Expert FusionabstractModern autonomous driving perception systems utilize complementary multi-modal sensors, such as LiDAR and cameras. Although sensor fusion architectures enhance performance in challenging environments, they still suffer significant performance drops under severe sensor failures, such as LiDAR beam reduction, LiDAR drop, limited field of view, camera drop, and occlusion. This limitation stems from inter-modality dependencies in current sensor fusion frameworks. In this study, we introduce an efficient and robust LiDAR-camera 3D object detector, referred to as MoME, which can achieve robust performance through a mixture of experts approach. Our MoME fully decouples modality dependencies using three parallel expert decoders, which use camera features, LiDAR features, or a combination of both to decode object queries, respectively. We propose Multi-Expert Decoding (MED) framework, where each query is decoded selectively using one of three expert decoders. MoME utilizes an Adaptive Query Router (AQR) to select the most appropriate expert decoder for each query based on the quality of camera and LiDAR features. This ensures that each query is processed by the best-suited expert, resulting in robust performance across diverse sensor failure scenarios. We evaluated the performance of MoME on the nuScenes-R benchmark. Our MoME achieved state-of-the-art performance in extreme weather and sensor failure conditions, significantly outperforming the existing models across various sensor failure scenarios. Konyul Park, Yecheol Kim, Daehun Kim |
CVPR | 1 |
| 2025 | Layer-Wise Modality Decomposition for Interpretable Multimodal Sensor FusionabstractIn autonomous driving, transparency in the decision-making of perception models is critical, as even a single misperception can be catastrophic. Yet with multi-sensor inputs, it is difficult to determine how each modality contributes to a prediction because sensor information becomes entangled within the fusion network. We introduce Layer-Wise Modality Decomposition (LMD), a post-hoc, model-agnostic interpretability method that disentangles modality-specific information across all layers of a pretrained fusion model. To our knowledge, LMD is the first approach to attribute the predictions of a perception model to individual input modalities in a sensor-fusion system for autonomous driving. We evaluate LMD on pretrained fusion models under camera–radar, camera–LiDAR, and camera–radar–LiDAR settings for autonomous driving. Its effectiveness is validated using structured perturbation-based metrics and modality-wise visual decompositions, demonstrating practical applicability to interpreting high-capacity multimodal architectures. Code is available at https://github.com/detxter-jvb/Layer-Wise-Modality-Decomposition. Konyul Park, Daehun Kim, Junseo Park |
NeurIPS | 2 |
| 2024 | Fine-Grained Pillar Feature Encoding Via Spatio-Temporal Virtual Grid for 3D Object DetectionabstractDeveloping high-performance, real-time architectures for LiDAR-based 3D object detectors is essential for the successful commercialization of autonomous vehicles. Pillar-based methods stand out as a practical choice for onboard deployment due to their computational efficiency. However, despite their efficiency, these methods can sometimes underperform compared to alternative point encoding techniques such as Voxel-encoding or PointNet++. We argue that current pillar-based methods have not sufficiently captured the fine-grained distributions of LiDAR points within each pillar structure. Consequently, there exists considerable room for improvement in pillar feature encoding. In this paper, we introduce a novel pillar encoding architecture referred to as Fine-Grained Pillar Feature Encoding (FG-PFE). FG-PFE utilizes Spatio-Temporal Virtual (STV) grids to capture the distribution of point clouds within each pillar across vertical, temporal, and horizontal dimensions. Through STV grids, points within each pillar are individually encoded using Vertical PFE (V-PFE), Temporal PFE (T-PFE), and Horizontal PFE (H-PFE). These encoded features are then aggregated through an Attentive Pillar Aggregation method. Our experiments conducted on the nuScenes dataset demonstrate that FG-PFE achieves significant performance improvements over baseline models such as PointPillar, CenterPoint-Pillar, and PillarNet, with only a minor increase in computational overhead. Konyul Park, Yecheol Kim, Junho Koh, Byungwoo Park |
ICRA | 1 |