mathematics

Review
Traffic Sign Detection and Recognition Using YOLO Object
Detection Algorithm: A Systematic Review
Marco Flores-Calero 1,2, * , César A. Astudillo 3, * , Diego Guevara 2 , Jessica Maza 2 , Bryan S. Lita 2 ,
Bryan Defaz 2 , Juan S. Ante 2 , David Zabala-Blanco 4 and José María Armingol Moreno 5

1 Department of Electrical, Electronics and Telecommunications, Universidad de las Fuerzas Armadas,

Av. General Rumiñahui s/n, Sangolquí 171103, Ecuador
2 Department of Systems Engineering, I&H Tech, Latacunga 050102, Ecuador
3 Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Engineering, Universidad de Talca, Curicó 3340000, Chile
4 Faculty of Engineering Sciences, Universidad Cátolica del Maule, Talca 3466706, Chile; [email protected]
5 Department of Systems and Automation Engineering, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid,
Av. de la Universidad 30, Leganés, 28911 Madrid, Spain; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected] (M.F.-C.); [email protected] (C.A.A.)

Abstract: Context: YOLO (You Look Only Once) is an algorithm based on deep neural networks with
real-time object detection capabilities. This state-of-the-art technology is widely available, mainly
due to its speed and precision. Since its conception, YOLO has been applied to detect and recognize
traffic signs, pedestrians, traffic lights, vehicles, and so on. Objective: The goal of this research is
to systematically analyze the YOLO object detection algorithm, applied to traffic sign detection and
recognition systems, from five relevant aspects of this technology: applications, datasets, metrics,
hardware, and challenges. Method: This study performs a systematic literature review (SLR) of
studies on traffic sign detection and recognition using YOLO published in the years 2016–2022.
Results: The search found 115 primary studies relevant to the goal of this research. After analyzing
these investigations, the following relevant results were obtained. The most common applications of
YOLO in this field are vehicular security and intelligent and autonomous vehicles. The majority of
the sign datasets used to train, test, and validate YOLO-based systems are publicly available, with an
Citation: Flores-Calero, M.; Astudillo,
emphasis on datasets from Germany and China. It has also been discovered that most works present
C.A.; Guevara, D.; Maza, J.; Lita, B.S.;
sophisticated detection, classification, and processing speed metrics for traffic sign detection and
Defaz, B.; Ante, J.S.; Zabala-Blanco, D.;
recognition systems by using the different versions of YOLO. In addition, the most popular desktop
Armingol Moreno, J.M. Traffic Sign
Detection and Recognition Using
data processing hardwares are Nvidia RTX 2080 and Titan Tesla V100 and, in the case of embedded
YOLO Object Detection Algorithm: A or mobile GPU platforms, Jetson Xavier NX. Finally, seven relevant challenges that these systems face
Systematic Review. Mathematics 2024, when operating in real road conditions have been identified. With this in mind, research has been
12, 297. https://doi.org/10.3390/ reclassified to address these challenges in each case. Conclusions: This SLR is the most relevant and
math12020297 current work in the field of technology development applied to the detection and recognition of traffic
signs using YOLO. In addition, insights are provided about future work that could be conducted to
Academic Editor: Marjan Mernik
improve the field.
Received: 19 November 2023
Revised: 6 January 2024 Keywords: YOLO; traffic sign detection and recognition; road accidents; systematic literature review;
Accepted: 12 January 2024 object detection; computer vision
Published: 17 January 2024

MSC: 68T07; 68T40; 68T45

Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
1. Introduction
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and Road Traffic Accidents (RTA) are among the leading causes of damage, injuries, or
conditions of the Creative Commons deaths worldwide [1]. These accidents are events that occur on roads and highways
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// involving vehicles. They can be attributed to various factors, including human error,
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ environmental conditions, technical malfunctions, or a combination of these. Furthermore,
4.0/). the World Health Organization (WHO) [2] indicates that diseases generated by traffic

Mathematics 2024, 12, 297. https://doi.org/10.3390/math12020297 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/mathematics

Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 2 of 31

accidents ranked eighth in the world in 2018, accounting for 2.5% of all deaths worldwide.
Based on data from 2015, the WHO also estimates that around 1.25 million deaths may
occur annually.
In the United States, approximately 12.15 million vehicles were involved in crashes in
2019. The number of road accidents per one million inhabitants in this country is forecast
to dip down in the next few years, reaching just over 7100 in 2025 [3]. In Europe, between
2010 and 2020, the number of road deaths decreased by 36%. Compared to 2019, when
there were 22,800 fatalities, 4000 fewer people lost their lives on EU roads in 2020 [4].
According to Yu et al. [1], many studies have focused on traffic safety, including
traffic accident analysis, vehicle collision detection, collision risk warning, and collision
prevention. In addition, several intelligent systems have been proposed that specialize
in traffic sign detection and recognition using computer vision (CV) and deep learning
(DL). In this context, one of the most popular technologies is the YOLO object detection
algorithm [5–13].
This article presents an SLR on the detection and recognition of traffic signs using the
YOLO object detection algorithm. In this context, a traffic sign serves as a visual guide to
convey information about road conditions, potential hazards, and other essential details
for safe road navigation [14]. Meanwhile, YOLO, a model based on convolutional neural
networks, is specifically designed for object detection [6]. This algorithm has been selected
because of its competitiveness compared to other methods based on DL, with respect to
processing speed on GPUs, high performance rates regarding the most critical metrics, and
simplicity [15–17].
Figure 1 shows the global scheme of this type of system. An input image captured with
a camera is fed to the YOLO object detection algorithm, and through a deep convolutional
neural network it detects objects and outputs isolated traffic signs when appropriate.
Subsequently, it provides pertinent information to the driver (or the autonomous driving
system) to make driving safer, more efficient, and comfortable.

Figure 1. General scheme of a traffic sign detection and recognition system using the YOLO object
detection algorithm. The central image has been taken from [18].

The main contributions of this SLR are to gather evidence to answer the following five
research questions (RQs): (1) what are the main applications of traffic sign detection and
recognition using YOLO? (2) What traffic sign datasets are used to train, validate, and test
these systems? (3) What metrics are used to measure the quality of object detection in the
context of traffic sign detection and recognition using YOLO? (4) What hardware is used to
implement traffic sign recognition and detection systems based on YOLO? (5) What are
the problems and challenges encountered in the detection and recognition of traffic signs
using YOLO?
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. This initial section outlines the
primary objective of this study. Section 2 details the materials and methods used in this
review. Section 3 focuses on the results of this study. Section 4 exhibits the research and
practical implications. Finally, the last part is devoted to conclusions and future work.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 3 of 31

2. Materials and Methods

This section provides details and guidelines essential for executing a targeted SLR
focused on the detection and recognition of traffic signs, employing the YOLO object
detection algorithm.

2.1. Traffic Signs

Traffic signs are visual cues and symbols that are placed on public roads to warn,
inform, order, or regulate the behavior of road users, especially in densely populated and
busy urban areas. They contain a simple visual symbolic language so that the driver can
interpret and instantly obtain information from the road for safe driving [5].
Traffic signs are typically made of reflective materials that are visible at night and
under low-light conditions. The reflective design not only enhances safety by facilitating
night-time visibility but also ensures that drivers can easily discern and understand the
intended messages. Each sign conveys a unique message and is distinguished by shape, color,
and size, aligning with specific road directives and offering drivers accurate and effective
communication, contributing to an overall safer and well-regulated traffic environment [14].
Among the multitude of characteristics, two stand out, namely shape and color,
from which traffic signs can be grouped into three types: prohibitive, preventive, and
informative [19,20]. Prohibitive (or regulatory) signs inform the driver of the restrictions
he must comply with; they are often circular and red in color. Preventive (or warning)
signs are warning signals for possible dangers on the road, generally yellow diamonds.
Informative (or indicative) signs are designed to assist drivers in navigation tasks. Typically,
these signs are rectangular and colored green or blue, providing essential information for
route guidance.
The visual appearance of traffic signs exhibits significant variability depending on the
country, posing a challenge for classification systems to achieve success. Obviously, this
represents a drawback for the development of global traffic sign detection and recognition
systems and limits their development to certain types of signs or countries [19]. Other chal-
lenging conditions are illumination changes, occlusions, perspectives, weather conditions,
aging, blur, and human artifacts. Under such extreme conditions, all methods are unable to
complete the detection task efficiently.

2.2. YOLO Object Detection Algorithm

YOLO is a state-of-the-art technology developed for object detection based on DL, with
emphasis on real-time and high-accuracy applications [21]. In YOLO, object detection is
treated as a regression problem where candidate images and their categories and confidence
indices are directly generated by regression. The detection result is finally determined by
setting a threshold of the confidence rate and the non-maximum suppression technique [6].
The primary advantage of YOLO lies in its capability for real-time image processing,
making it well-suited for applications like autonomous vehicles and Advanced Driver
Assistance Systems (ADAS) [18]. Moreover, YOLO achieves state-of-the-art accuracy with
limited training data, surpassing other methods. Additionally, its ease of implementation
and user-friendliness contribute to its popularity in the field of computer vision (CV).
In contrast, several authors have identified some limitations and handicaps. One
important limitation is that YOLO struggles to detect small objects. The algorithm divides
an image into grid cells and detects objects within these cells. Objects smaller than these
predefined areas may be missed by the algorithm. Another problem is that YOLO does
not consider the semantics of the image, ignoring the meaning of the visual data. Certain
versions of YOLO are pre-trained using academic datasets, not considering real data that
may be blurry, contain obstructed objects, and generally have a low resolution [22].
The first models were implemented by Redmon et al. [21], Redmon and Farhadi [23,24],
starting with the first version in 2016, using the convolutional neural network called Dark-
Net [25]; followed by the second known as YOLO9000 [23] in 2017, using Darknet-19; ending
the saga in 2018 with YOLOv3 [24], using Darknet-53. The fourth version corresponds to
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 4 of 31

Bochkovskiy et al. [26,27] released in April 2020, also uses CSPDarknet-53. The fifth version
was released in May 2020, by Jocher and the company Ultralytics [28]; this variant uses
CSPNet as a neural network. YOLOv5 comes in different versions, YOLOv5s, YOLOv5m,
YOLOv5l, and YOLOv5x.
It is important to mention that this research has only considered the five fundamental
versions of the YOLO object detection algorithm. Other variants have been compressed
into the original models, for example, the YOLO tiny.

2.3. State of the Art

Presently, there is a limited corpus of literature specifically addressing the detec-
tion and recognition of traffic signs utilizing systematic review or survey methodologies.
Nonetheless, noteworthy contributions exist, particularly those investigating machine
learning methods and their integration in the advancement of ADAS [18] or autonomous
vehicles devices. Liu et al. [5] have presented a study in which traffic sign detection meth-
ods are grouped into five categories: color-based methods, shape-based methods, color-
and shape-based methods, machine-learning-based methods, and LIDAR-based methods.
They have also shown that mobile laser scanning technology has experienced significant
growth in the last five years and has been a key solution in many ADAS. Interestingly, the
prevalence of YOLO-based systems is scarcely acknowledged within the scope of their
findings. Wali et al. [29] have indicated that the investigation of automatic traffic sign
detection and recognition systems is a crucial research area targeted at advancing CV-based
ADAS. Additionally, this article provides a comprehensive examination of methods for
detecting, classifying, and tracking traffic signs using machine learning. Notably, the use
of YOLO is not explicitly mentioned. On the other hand, Borrego-Carazo et al. [30] have
conducted a systematic review of machine learning techniques and embedded systems
for implementing ADAS on mobile devices. Their examination extends to a marginal
analysis of traffic sign recognition within the framework of machine-learning methodolo-
gies, with particular emphasis on the absence of any reference to the YOLO algorithm, a
notable omission in the contemporary discourse on such systems. In their contribution,
Muhammad et al. [31] have conducted a comprehensive analysis elucidating the challenges
and prospective trajectories within the domain of DL applications for autonomous vehicle
development. Within this framework, particular emphasis is placed on sign detection
systems tailored for traffic, acknowledged as pivotal components in the evolution of future
vehicles. It is noteworthy that the YOLO algorithm garners substantial attention, especially
concerning its application in the realm of traffic light detection.
Concluding this study, Diwan et al. [16] have presented the fundamental architectures,
applications, and challenges associated with various object detectors based on DL neural
networks. The authors posit that YOLO manifests notable superiority, particularly in terms
of both detection accuracy and inference time. Unfortunately, the study lacks specific
information pertaining to YOLO-based traffic sign detection systems.

2.4. Systematic Literature Review Methodology

This section presents an overview of the planning, conducting, and reporting a review
following the SLR process outlined in [32].
An SLR is used to identify, select, and systematically evaluate all relevant evidence on
a specific topic. The SLR process searches for various databases and sources of information,
using rigorous selection criteria to identify relevant studies and assess the quality of those
studies. An SLR is considered a rigorous and objective way of summarizing and analyzing
existing evidence on a topic and is frequently utilized in areas such as health and social
sciences to inform research and decisionmaking.
SLRs have applications in different fields of engineering. For example, they can
help engineers identify the latest trends and developments in a specific field, analyze
the effectiveness of different techniques and approaches used in previous projects, and
identify potential problems or challenges in a particular engineering area. SLRs can also
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 5 of 31

help compare different studies and assess the quality of existing evidence on a specific
topic. Overall, SLRs are a valuable tool for engineering research and decisionmaking [33].
The review protocol followed in this investigation consists of six stages: defining the
research questions, designing a search strategy, selecting the studies, measuring the quality
of the articles, extracting the data, and synthesizing the data [33].
First, we develop a set of research questions based on the objective of this SLR. Next,
we develop a search strategy to find studies relevant to our research questions. This
step involved defining the scientific databases to be used in the process and the search
terms. In the third stage, we specify the criteria for determining articles that address the
research questions and those discarded from the study. As part of this phase, pilot studies
were conducted to establish inclusion and exclusion criteria more effectively. In the next
stage, the quality of the articles is quantified to determine whether they met the minimum
standards for inclusion in the review. The following steps considered data extraction
and synthesis. During the data extraction stage, a pilot process was also performed to
determine which data to extract and how to store them for subsequent synthesis. Finally, in
the synthesis stage, we decided on strategies to generate syntheses depending on the type
of data analyzed [34].
Following a protocol for SLR is vital to ensure rigor, reproducibility, and minimize
investigator bias. In the remainder of this section, details of the review protocol are
presented in detail [34].

2.5. Research Questions

The RQs are derived from the general objective of the investigation and structure the
literature search, determining the selection criteria for including or excluding studies in the
review. The RQs are also used to guide the interpretation and analysis of the review results.
The following are the RQs formulated in this investigation.
RQ1 [Applications]: What are the main applications of traffic sign detection and
recognition using YOLO?
Knowing the applications of traffic sign detection helps researchers and developers
identify areas of opportunity and challenges in the field of CV. This can lead to new
advances and improvements in traffic sign detection technology. Additionally, knowing
the applications of traffic sign detection can also be useful for users of the technology as it
provides a better understanding of how traffic sign detection can be employed.
RQ2 [Datasets]: What traffic sign datasets are used to train, validate, and test
these systems?
For several reasons, it is essential to know the datasets used to validate the detection
and recognition of traffic signs. First, the datasets provide a source of information to
evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of detection methods. Second, datasets also allow
us to observe the behavior of recognition systems in different situations and with different
types of data, which allows us to improve and optimize the application. Furthermore,
knowledge of the datasets makes it possible to identify potential application problems or
errors and correct them before launching them on the market.
RQ3 [Metrics]: What metrics are used to measure the quality of object detection in the
context of traffic sign detection and recognition using YOLO?
Performance metrics to measure the accuracy of object detection are crucial for the
proper functioning of traffic sign detection and recognition systems. If object detection
is not accurate, these systems may not function properly and may even be dangerous
to humans. Additionally, these performance measures are useful to compare different
object detection systems and algorithms and determine which one is the most suitable for a
particular application. Finally, knowing appropriate metrics allows one to identify errors in
an object detection system and to develop solutions to improve its accuracy.
RQ4 [Hardware]: What hardware is used to implement traffic sign recognition and
detection systems based on YOLO?
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 6 of 31

Hardware is a crucial element in traffic recognition systems as it provides the pro-

cessing and storage capacity needed to analyze and process the video images captured
by the cameras. Without the right hardware, traffic recognition systems would not be
able to function properly and would not be able to detect and track objects in real time.
Additionally, hardware also plays an important role in the speed and efficiency of traffic
recognition and detection systems as more powerful hardware can process and analyze
images faster and more accurately.
RQ5 [Challenges]: What are the problems and challenges encountered in the detection
and recognition of traffic signs using YOLO?
Being aware of the problems and challenges of traffic sign detection and recognition
using YOLO helps researchers and developers to identify areas where the technology needs
to be improved. Also, knowing these problems and challenges enables better understanding
of its limitations and potential drawbacks. This helps to make informed decisions about
the appropriate use of the technology mentioned above.

2.6. Search Strategy

This section presents the steps used to identify, select, and evaluate relevant studies for
inclusion in the review. It includes a description of databases and sources of information,
keywords, and inclusion and exclusion criteria applied to identify relevant studies.

2.6.1. Databases of Digital Library

In the context of an SLR, a database is a collection of published research articles that
can be searched using specific keywords. These databases are typically used to identify
relevant studies to be included in the review. The selected databases for this study are
IEEE Xplore, MDPI, Plos, Science Direct, Wiley, Sage, Hindawi Publishing Group, Taylor &
Francis, and Springer Nature, all of which contain articles indexed in Web of Science (WoS)
and/or Scopus.
WoS serves as a robust research database and citation index, offering a widely utilized
platform that grants access to an extensive array of scholarly articles, conference proceed-
ings, and various research materials. Conversely, Scopus, produced by Elsevier Co., is an
abstract and indexing database with embedded full-text links.
Furthermore, IEEE Xplore, MDPI, Plos, Science Direct, Wiley, Sage, Hindawi Publish-
ing Group, Taylor & Francis, and Springer Nature are renowned digital libraries. These
platforms provide access to an expansive collection of scientific and technical content,
encompassing disciplines such as electrical engineering, computer science, electronics, and
other related fields.

2.6.2. Timeframe of Study

This study encompasses documents published from 2016 through the end of 2022,
extending to early publications of 2023. The selection of 2016 as the starting point aligns
with the initial release of the YOLO algorithm.

2.6.3. Keywords
The primary keywords used to search for relevant studies are YOLO, traffic sign,
recognition, detection, identification, and object detection.
Later on, the search strings formulated with these keywords will be presented for each
digital library.

2.6.4. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

To ensure that the SLR concentrates on high-quality, relevant studies, specific inclusion
and exclusion criteria are defined.
Inclusion Criteria:
• Studies must evaluate traffic sign detection or recognition using the YOLO object
detection algorithm.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 7 of 31

• Only studies published between 2016 and 2022 are considered.

• The study should be published in a peer-reviewed journal or conference proceedings.
• Preference is given to documents categorized as “Journal” or “Conference” articles.
• The study must be in English.
Exclusion Criteria:
• Studies that do not utilize the YOLO object detection algorithm for traffic sign detection
or recognition.
• Research not focused on traffic sign detection or recognition.
• Publications outside the 2016–2022 timeframe.
• Non-peer-reviewed articles and documents.
• Studies published in languages other than English.

2.6.5. Study Selection

This section outlines the search and selection methodology used in this study, detailing
the progression from the initial number of articles identified to the final selection of studies
included in the review.
In the initial phase, a keyword-based search across nine bibliographic databases
yielded a total of 594,890 documents. The search strings employed, along with the number
of articles identified in each digital library, are detailed in Table 1.

Table 1. Search strings formulated with the keywords for each digital library.

Databases Search Strings Results

((“All Metadata”: Traffic Sign) AND ((“All Metadata”:Detection) OR (“All Metadata”:Recognition)
IEEE OR (“All Metadata”:Identification)) AND (“All Metadata”: Object Detection) OR (“All 2722
Metadata”:YOLO))
‘Object AND Detection AND “Traffic Sign” AND (Detection OR Recognition OR Identification OR
Springer 1852
YOLO)’
All Fields: Traffic Sign Detection OR All Fields: Traffic Sign Recognition OR All Fields: Traffic Sign
MDPI 498
Identification AND Keywords: You Only Look Once OR Keywords: Object Detection
Hindawi P.G. (“Traffic Sign” AND (“Detection” OR “Recognition” OR “Identification”)) AND (“YOLO”) 16
(Traffic Sign OR Traffic Sign Detection OR Traffic Sign Recognition OR Traffic Sign Identification OR
Science Direct 80,650
Object Detection) AND (YOLO OR You Only Look Once)
“Traffic Sign OR Detection OR Recognition OR Identification” anywhere and “YOLO OR Object
Wiley 160,803
Detection” anywhere
Sage Traffic Sign OR Detection OR Recognition OR Identification AND Object Detection OR YOLO 72,941
[All: traffic] AND [[All: sign] OR [All: detection] OR [All: recognition] OR [All: identification]] AND
Taylor & Francis 135,385
[[All: object] OR [All: detection] OR [All: yolo]]
((((everything: “Traffic Sign”) AND everything:Detection) OR everything:Identification) OR
PLOS 140,023
everything:YOLO) OR everything: “Object Detection”

The search was then narrowed to include only publications from 2016 to 2022, with
early access articles from 2023 also considered. This refinement resulted in the exclusion
of 369,215 documents. Further filtering focused on documents classified under ‘Journals’
or ‘Conferences’, leading to the elimination of an additional 15,020 documents. Priority
was given to articles employing YOLO as the primary detection method, which further nar-
rowed the field by excluding 209,378 documents. After these initial stages, 1448 documents
remained across all databases. Additionally, 171 articles were specifically sourced from the
WoS and Scopus.
A thorough curation process followed. This involved removing duplicates (755 docu-
ments), and applying stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria, which led to the further
removal of 364 documents due to keyword-related issues, 177 for abstract-related discrep-
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 8 of 31

ancies, and 37 for lack of sufficient information. The culmination of this meticulous process
resulted in a final selection of 115 documents, which comprise the corpus for analysis in
this SLR.

2.7. Data Extraction

The data extraction step in SLR is a process of collecting relevant information from the
primary studies that meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The purpose of this step is
to synthesize and analyze the data to answer the research question and validate the results
of the SLR.
To determine YOLO’s practical applications, we applied a rigorous evaluation frame-
work, guided by experts. This approach revealed three main domains: road safety, ADAS,
and autonomous driving. When an article did not explicitly mention its application domain,
we conducted a thorough analysis to deduce the specific context.
To identify relevant datasets, a comprehensive keyword search for ‘data set’ was
performed within each article. Upon locating a dataset, its relevance was carefully evaluated
before meticulously recording it in the extraction table.
Furthermore, a rigorous review of each article was undertaken to pinpoint and docu-
ment the specific metrics utilized. These metrics were then systematically integrated into
the extraction table, ensuring comprehensive documentation and analysis.
Additionally, we conducted a thorough examination of the hardware configurations
employed in each study, systematically recording these details in the extraction table.
This approach facilitated the identification of prevalent and frequently used hardware
components.
To delineate the challenges intrinsic to YOLO technology, we applied an expert-defined
criterion, outlining seven distinct categories: variations in lighting conditions, adverse
weather conditions, partial occlusion, signs with visible damage, complex scenarios, sub-
optimal image quality, and region-specific concerns. In numerous instances, the application
domain may remain implicit, necessitating a detailed analysis of each article to deduce the
specific challenge at hand.

2.8. Data Synthesis

The data synthesis step in SLR is the process of gathering and interpreting the relevant
data extracted from the selected studies to answer the research questions of the SLR.
First, we categorized real-world YOLO applications, providing a clear overview of
deployment areas. Next, we aggregated and cataloged referenced datasets, noting their
specific characteristics and providing a comprehensive view of data sources. The metrics
employed in various studies were synthesized, revealing prevalent evaluation method-
ologies. Also, hardware configurations were analyzed, uncovering prevailing trends and
supporting the technological landscape. Moreover, challenges in YOLO technology were
categorized, shedding light on limitations and areas for improvement.
This synthesis process was crucial in distilling key findings and trends from the
extensive literature, offering a nuanced understanding of YOLO technology and its real-
world applications.

3. Results Based on RQs

In this section, a critical analysis is performed on 115 primary studies based on the
previously described RQs and five different aspects: applications, sign datasets, metrics,
hardware, and challenges.

3.1. RQ1 [Applications]: What Are the Main Applications of Traffic Sign Detection and
Recognition Using YOLO?
The search revealed three main applications of YOLO: road safety, ADAS, and au-
tonomous driving.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 9 of 31

Road Safety: Road safety refers to the efforts used to reduce the likelihood of collisions
and protect road users. This includes different efforts and legislation aimed at encour-
aging safe driving practices, improving road infrastructure, monitoring road conditions,
identifying road dangers, and improving traffic management and vehicle safety [35–43].
For example, YOLO can be implemented in traffic cameras to identify and evaluate
congestion, traffic flow, and accidents, which can influence decisionmaking to improve
traffic management and reduce the probability of accidents. Furthermore, YOLO can be
integrated with intelligent transportation systems to monitor the movements of pedestrians
and cyclists and improve road safety for non-motorized road users.
ADAS: Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) are technologies designed to
enhance road safety and the driving experience. They utilize a combination of sensors,
cameras, and advanced algorithms to aid drivers in various driving tasks [30,44].
ADAS can utilize YOLO to detect and recognize objects in real-time video streams [6].
In this context, YOLO can be applied to detect and recognize traffic signs [7–10,18,45–86].
Autonomous Driving: Autonomous driving is significantly dependent on CV tech-
nologies to perceive and evaluate the driving environment. Using cameras and algorithms,
CV systems provide relevant information to autonomous vehicles about their surroundings,
such as the position and behavior of other cars, pedestrians, and transport networks. These
data are used for decisionmaking, vehicle control, and safe road navigation. To develop
autonomous driving systems, a vehicle should generally be equipped with numerous
sensors and communication systems [11–13,87–136].

3.2. RQ2 [Datasets]: What Traffic Sign Datasets Are Used to Train, Validate, and Test
These Systems?
Traffic sign datasets are collections of images that contain traffic signs and their
annotations. They are used for training, validating, and testing different proposed traffic
sign detection and recognition systems.
There are many traffic sign datasets that have been created and used by researchers and
practitioners. Some of them are publicly available, while others are private, i.e., restricted
to the scientific community. The main datasets that have been used are as follows:
1. The German Traffic Sign Detection Benchmark (GTSDB) and the German Traffic
Sign Recognition Benchmark (GTSRB): The GTSDB and GTSRB datasets are two
popular resources for traffic sign recognition research. They contain high-quality
images of various traffic signs taken in real-world scenarios in Germany. The images
cover a wide range of scenery, times of day, and weather conditions, making them
suitable for testing the robustness of recognition algorithms. The GTSDB dataset
consists of 900 images, split into 600 for training and 300 for validation. The GTSRB
dataset is larger, with more than 50,000 images of 43 classes of traffic signs, such as
speed limit signs, stop signs, yield signs, and others. Images are also annotated with
bounding boxes and class labels. Both datasets are publicly available and have been
used in several benchmarking studies [7,13,37,38,40,46,47,50,52,53,55,58–60,63–66,68–
72,77,80,82,92,96,101,103,104,106,109,112,114,115,117,118,125,127,129,130,136,137].
2. Tsinghua Tencent 100K (TT100K): The TT100K dataset is a large-scale traffic sign
benchmark created by Tsinghua University and Tencent. It consists of 100,000 images
from Tencent Street View panoramas, which contain 30,000 traffic sign instances. The
images vary in lighting and weather conditions, and each traffic sign is annotated
with its class label, bounding box, and pixel mask. The dataset is suitable for traffic
sign detection and classification tasks in realistic scenarios. The TT100K dataset is
publicly available and can be used for both traffic sign detection and classification tasks
[35,38,41,45,51,65,67,80,84,94,95,102,105,108,109,111,113,121,124,128,131,133–135].
3. Chinese Traffic Sign Dataset (CTSDB y CCTSDB): The CTSDB and CCTSDB datasets are
two large-scale collections of traffic sign images for CV research. The CTSDB dataset
consists of 10,000 images captured from different scenes and angles, covering a variety of
types and shapes of traffic signs. The CCTSDB dataset is an extension of the CTSD dataset,
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 10 of 31

with more than 20,000 images that contain approximately 40,000 traffic signs. The CCTSDB
dataset also includes more challenging scenarios, such as occlusion, illumination variation,
and scale change [8,18,36,39,60,65,68,81–83,85,87,108,116,130,132,135,136,138].
4. Belgium Traffic Sign Detection Benchmark and Belgium Traffic Sign Classification
Benchmark (BTSDB y BTCDB): The BTSDB dataset, specifically designed for traffic
sign detection in Belgium, comprises a total of 7095 images. These images are further
divided into 4575 training images and 2520 testing images. The dataset encompasses
a diverse range of image sizes, spanning from 11 × 10 pixels to 562 × 438 pixels.
The Belgium Traffic Sign Classification Benchmark is a dataset of traffic sign images
collected from eight cameras mounted on a van. The dataset contains 62 types of traffic
signs and is divided into training and testing sets. The dataset is useful for evaluating
traffic sign recognition algorithms, which are essential for intelligent transport systems
and autonomous driving. The dataset also provides annotations, background images,
and test sequences for further analysis [55,78,101,123].
5. Malaysian Traffic Sign Dataset (MTSD): The MTSD includes a variety of traffic sign
scenes to be used in traffic sign detection, having 1000 images with different resolutions
(FHD 1920 × 977 pixels; 4K-UHD 3840 × 2160 pixels; UHD+ 4592 × 3448 pixels). It also
has 2056 images of traffic signs, divided into five categories, for recognition [11,118].
6. Korea Traffic Sign Dataset (KTSD): This dataset has been used to train and test various
deep learning architectures, such as YOLOv3 [57], to detect three different classes of
traffic signs: prohibitory, mandatory, and danger. The KTSD contains 3300 images of
various traffic signs, captured from different roads throughout South Korea. These
images feature traffic signs of varying sizes, providing a diverse and comprehensive
dataset for traffic sign detection and recognition research [57,59,64].
7. Berkley Deep Drive (BDD100K): The Berkeley DeepDrive (BDD) project has re-
leased a large-scale and diverse driving video dataset called BDD100K. It contains
100,000 videos with rich annotations to evaluate the progress of image recognition
algorithms on autonomous driving. The dataset is available for research purposes
and can be downloaded from the BDD website (https://bdd-data.berkeley.edu/,
accessed on 12 April 2023). The images in the dataset are divided into two sets: one
for training and one for validation. The training set contains 70% of the images, while
the validation set contains the remaining 30% [55,90].
8. Thai (Thailand) Traffic Sign Dataset (TTSD): The data collection process takes place
in the rural areas of Maha Sarakham and Kalasin Provinces within the Kingdom
of Thailand. It encompasses 50 distinct classes of traffic signs, each comprising
200 unique instances, resulting in a comprehensive sign dataset that comprises a total
of 9357 images [101,126].
9. Swedish Traffic Sign Dataset (STSD): This public sign dataset comprises
20,000 images, with 20% of them labeled. Additionally, it contains 3488 traffic signs
from Sweden [104].
10. DFG Traffic Sign Dataset (DFG): The DFG dataset comprises approximately
7000 traffic sign images captured from highways in Slovenia. These images have
a resolution of 1920 × 1080 pixels. To facilitate training and evaluation, the dataset is
divided into two subsets, with 5254 images designated for training and the remaining
1703 images for validation. The dataset features a total of 13,239 meticulously anno-
tated instances in the form of polygons, each spanning over 30 pixels. Additionally,
there are 4359 instances with less precise annotations represented as bounding boxes,
measuring less than 30 pixels in width [12].
11. Taiwan Traffic Sign Dataset (TWTSD: The TWTSD dataset comprises 900 prohibitory
signs from Taiwan with a resolution of 1920 × 1080 pixels. The training and validation
subsets are divided into 70% and 30%, respectively [75].
12. Taiwan Traffic Sign (TWSintetic): The Taiwan Traffic Sign (TWSintetic) dataset is
a collection of traffic signs from Taiwan, consisting of 900 images, and it has been
expanded using generative adversarial network techniques [9].
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 11 of 31

13. Belgium Traffic Signs (KUL): The KUL dataset encompasses over 10,000 images
of traffic signs from the Flanders region in Belgium, categorized into more than
100 distinct classes [89].
14. Chinese Traffic Sign Detection Benchmark (CSUST): The CSUST dataset comprises
over 15,000 images and is continuously updated to incorporate new data [8].
15. Foggy Road Image Database (FRIDA): The Foggy Road Image Database (FRIDA)
contains 90 synthetic images from 18 scenes depicting various urban road settings.
In contrast, FRIDA2 offers an extended collection, with 330 images derived from
66 road scenes. For each clear image, there are corresponding counterparts featuring
four levels of fog and a depth map. The fog variations encompass uniform fog,
heterogeneous fog, foggy haze, and heterogeneous foggy haze [71,114].
16. Foggy ROad Sign Images (FROSI): The FROSI is a database of synthetic images easily
usable to evaluate the performance of road sign detectors in a systematic way in
foggy conditions. The database contains a set of 504 original images 1400 × 600 with
1620 road signs (speed and stop signs, pedestrian crossing) placed at various ranges,
with ground truth [71,114].
17. MarcTR: This dataset contains seven traffic sign classes, collected by using a ZED
stereo camera mounted on top of Racecar mini autonomous car [79].
18. Turkey Traffic Sign Dataset: The Turkey Traffic Sign Dataset is an essential resource for
the development of traffic and road safety technologies, specifically tailored for the
Turkish environment. It comprises approximately 2500 images, including a diverse
range of traffic signs, pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles, all captured under real-world
conditions in Turkey [77].
19. Vietnamese Traffic Sign Dataset: This comprehensive dataset encompasses 144 classes
of traffic signs found in Vietnam, categorized into four distinct groups for ease of
analysis and application. These include 40 prohibitory or restrictive signs, 47 warning
signs, 10 mandatory signs, and 47 indication signs, providing a detailed overview of
the country’s traffic sign system [76].
20. Croatia Traffic Sign Dataset: This dataset consists of 28 video sequences at 30 FPS
with a resolution of 720 × 480 pixels. They were taken in the urban traffic of the city
of Osijek, Croatia [10].
21. Mexican Traffic Sign Dataset: The dataset consists of 1284 RGB images, featuring a
total of 1426 traffic signs categorized into 11 distinct classes. These images capture
traffic signs from a variety of perspectives, sizes, and lighting conditions, ensuring a
diverse and comprehensive collection. The traffic sign images were sourced from a
range of locations including avenues, roadways, parks, green areas, parking lots, and
malls in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua, and Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico, providing
a broad representation of the region’s signage [43].
22. WHUTCTSD: It is a more recent dataset with five categories of Chinese traffic signs,
including prohibitory signs, guide signs, mandatory signs, danger warning signs, and
tourist signs. Data were collected by a camera at a 1920 × 1080 pixel resolution during
different time periods. It consists of 2700 images, which were extracted from videos
collected in Wuhan, Hubei, China [62].
23. Bangladesh Road Sign 2021 (BDRS2021): This dataset consists of 16 classes. Each class
consists of 168 images of Bangladesh road signs [69], offering a rich source of data
that capture the specific traffic sign environment of Bangladesh, including its urban,
rural, and varied geographical landscapes.
24. New Zealand Traffic Sign 3K (NZ-TS3K): This dataset is a specialized collection fo-
cused on traffic sign recognition in New Zealand [70]. It features over 3000 images,
showcasing a wide array of traffic signs commonly found across the country. These
images are captured in high resolution (1080 by 1440 pixels), providing clear and
detailed visuals essential for accurate recognition and analysis. The dataset is cate-
gorized into multiple classes, each representing a different type of traffic sign. These
include Stop (236 samples), Keep Left (536 samples), Road Diverges (505 samples),
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 12 of 31

Road Bump (619 samples), Crosswalk Ahead (636 samples), Give Way at Roundabout
(533 samples), and Roundabout Ahead (480 samples), offering a diverse range of signs
commonly seen on Auckland’s roads.
25. Mapillary Traffic Sign Dataset (MapiTSD): The Mapillary Traffic Sign Dataset is an
expansive and diverse collection of traffic sign images, sourced globally from the
Mapillary platform’s extensive street-level imagery. It features millions of images
from various countries, each annotated with automatically detected traffic signs.
This dataset is characterized by its wide-ranging geographic coverage and diversity
in environmental conditions, including different lighting, weather, and sign types.
Continuously updated, it provides a valuable up-to-date resource for training and
validating traffic sign recognition algorithms [38].
26. Specialized Research Datasets: These datasets consist of traffic sign data compiled by various
authors. Generally, they lack detailed public information and are not openly accessible. This
category includes datasets from a variety of countries: South Korea [91,103], India [49,99],
Malaysia [97], Indonesia [98], Slovenia [54], Argentina [139], Taiwan [74,107,140],
Bangladesh [69], and Canada [61]. Each dataset is tailored to its respective country,
reflecting the specific traffic signs and road conditions found there.
27. Unknown or General Databases (Unknown): Consist of those datasets that do not have
any certain information on the subject of traffic [22,42,64,73,86,88,93,99,100,110,119,122,141],
or directly constitute general databases such as MSCOCO [63,73,99], KITTI [132], or
those that are downloaded from repositories such as Kaggle [42].
Table 2 presents the distribution of traffic sign datasets based on their country of origin,
database name, number of categories and classes, number of images, and the researchers
utilizing them.
A substantial number of articles in this study utilize publicly available databases,
known for their convenience in model evaluation and result comparison. MapiTSD,
BDD100K, and TT100K are prominent due to their extensive image datasets, while GTSDB
and GTSRB are the most cited, comprising 27.33% of the citations, followed by TT100K,
with 16.15% of the citations.

3.3. RQ3 [Metrics]: What Metrics Are Used to Measure the Quality of Object Detection in the
Context of Traffic Sign Detection and Recognition Using YOLO?
Various performance metrics are frequently employed to measure the efficacy of traffic
sign recognition systems. This section provides a summary of the metrics utilized most
frequently in the articles under consideration.
In assessing the computational efficacy and real-time performance of traffic sign
detection systems and other object recognition applications, frames per second (FPS) is
a commonly employed metric. FPS, detailed in Equation (1), measures the number of
video frames per second that a system can process, providing valuable insight into the
system’s responsiveness to changing traffic conditions. Achieving a high FPS is essential for
deployment in the real world because it ensures timely and accurate responses in dynamic
environments such as autonomous vehicles and traffic management systems. Researchers
evaluate FPS by executing the system on representative datasets or actual video streams,
taking into account factors such as algorithm complexity, hardware configuration, and
frame size. FPS, when combined with other metrics such as mAP, precision, and recall,
contributes to a comprehensive evaluation of the system’s overall performance, taking into
account both accuracy and speed, which are crucial considerations for practical applications.

# of frames
FPS = (1)
seconds
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 13 of 31

Table 2. Summary of the traffic sign datasets extracted from scientific papers and employed in the
development of traffic sign detection and recognition systems using YOLO in the period 2016–2022.

Number of Number of
Country of Name of Number of Number of Number of Percentage
Order Traffic Referenced
Origin Dataset Categories Classes Images (%)
Signs Articles
1 Germany GTSRB and +3 43 52,740 52,740 44 27.33
GTSDB 900 910
2 China TT100K 3 130 100,000 30,000 26 16.15
3 China CTSDB 10,000 21 13.04
CCTSDB 3 21 ∼20,000 ∼40,000
4 Belgium BTSDB and 3 62 17,000 4627 6 3.73
BTSCB 7125 7125
5 South Korea KTSD - - 3300 - 3 1.86
6 Malaysia MTSD 5 66 1000 2 1.86
2056 2056
7 USA BDD1OOK - - 100,000 - 2 1.86
8 Thailand TTSD - 50 9357 - 2 1.86
9 France FRIDA and - 90 - 2 1.86
FRIDA2 - 300
10 France FROSI - 4 504 1620 2 1.86
11 Sweden STSD - 7 20,000 3488 2 1.86
12 Slovenia DFG +3 +200 7000 13,239 1 0.62
4359
13 Taiwan TWTSD - - 900 - 1 0.62
14 Taiwan TWynthetic - 3 - 900 1 0.62
15 Belgium KUL - +100 +10,000 - 1 0.62
16 China CSUST - - 15,000 - 1 0.62
17 MarcTR - 7 3564 3564 1 0.62
18 Turkey - 22 2500 1 0.62
19 Vietnam - 4 144 5000 5704 1 0.62
20 Croatia - - 11 5567 6751 1 0.62
21 Mexico - 3 11 1284 1426 1 0.62
22 China WHUTCTSD 5 - 2700 4009 1 0.62
23 Bangladesh BDRS2021 4 16 2688 - 1 0.62
New
24 NZ-TS3K 3 7 3436 3545 1 0.62
Zealand
25 AW 1 MapiTSD - 300 100,000 320,000 1 0.62
26 SW 2 Own - - - - 14 8.70
27 SW Unknown - - - 21 13.0
Total 161 100.00
1 AW: around the world; 2 SW: somewhere in the world.

Accuracy (ACC) is a fundamental and often used metric in the field of traffic sign
detection and object recognition systems to evaluate their performance. The accuracy of
traffic sign identification, as measured by the ACC metric, and specified in Equation (2),
is determined by the proportion of correctly recognized traffic signs, including both true
positives (TP) and true negatives (TN), relative to the total number of traffic signs. This core
statistic offers vital insights into the overall efficacy of the system in accurately categorizing
items of interest. The accuracy of predictions, as measured by the ACC metric, serves as
a dependable indicator of the system’s capacity to differentiate between various kinds
of traffic signs. ACC is widely used by researchers and practitioners to fully assess and
compare different detection algorithms and models, thereby facilitating the progress and
enhancement of technology related to traffic sign recognition.

TP + TN
ACC = (2)
TP + FP + TN + FN
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 14 of 31

Precision and recall are crucial metrics used to evaluate the performance of algorithms
in the context of traffic sign detection and recognition. Precision is a metric that quantifies
the proportion of correctly identified positive instances in relation to the total number of
instances identified as being positive. It serves as an indicator of the accuracy of positive
predictions and aims to minimize the occurrence of false positives. On the other hand,
recall, which is sometimes referred to as sensitivity or true positive rate, measures the
proportion of true positives in relation to the total number of positive instances, thereby
reflecting the model’s capacity to identify all pertinent instances and reduce the occurrence
of false negatives. These complementing measures have significant value in situations
where the importance of accuracy and completeness is paramount. They allow researchers
to strike a compromise between the system’s capacity to produce precise predictions and its
ability to minimize instances of missed detections. By achieving a harmonious equilibrium,
precision and recall offer a thorough assessment of the total efficacy of the system in the
realm of traffic sign recognition, hence augmenting the advancement and implementation
of dependable recognition systems. The mathematical expressions for precision and recall
are detailed in Equations (3) and (4), respectively.

TP
Precision = (3)
TP + FP
TP
Recall = (4)
TP + FN
The F1 score is a crucial statistic in the field of traffic sign detection and identification
since it effectively represents the equilibrium between precision and recall by providing a
consolidated number. The F1 score is calculated as the harmonic mean of two measures,
providing a comprehensive evaluation of algorithm performance. It takes into account
the accuracy of positive predictions as well as the system’s capability to correctly identify
all relevant cases. This statistic is particularly valuable in scenarios characterized by
unbalanced datasets or disparate class distributions. The F1 score enables researchers and
practitioners to thoroughly assess the efficacy of the model, facilitating the advancement of
resilient and flexible traffic sign recognition systems that achieve an ideal balance between
precision and recall. The formula representing the F1 score is as follows:

Precision × Recall
F1 = 2 × (5)
Precision + Recall
Mean Average Precision (mAP) is the metric used by excellence to evaluate the preci-
sion of an object detector. In the context of object detection tasks, mAP is widely recognized
as a comprehensive and reliable performance metric. It takes precision and recall at multi-
ple levels of confidence thresholds into account and provides an informative evaluation of
the detector’s capabilities. By considering varying recall levels, mAP provides insight into
how well the detector performs at various sensitivity levels. The mAP is determined by
Equation (6).
K
1
mAP =
K ∑ APk (6)
k =1

Intersection over Union (IoU) is another crucial metric utilized in the field of traffic sign
detection and recognition. It serves to measure the degree of spatial overlap between the
predicted bounding boxes and the ground truth bounding boxes of observed objects. The
IoU detailed in Equation (7) quantifies the precision of traffic sign localization by calculating
the ratio between the area of intersection and the area of union of the detected boxes. That
is, the IoU metric is an important part of figuring out how accurate object boundaries
are and how well an algorithm can figure out where something is. This measure holds
particular significance in situations where exact object localization is of utmost importance,
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 15 of 31

hence contributing to the progress of reliable traffic sign detection and recognition systems
with correct spatial comprehension.

Bgt ∩ Bpt
IoU = (7)
Bgt ∪ Bpt
where the variable Bgt represents the ground truth bounding box, whereas B pt represents
the predicted bounding box.
Finally, the Average Precision (AP) measure bears great importance in the field of
traffic sign identification and recognition. It provides a thorough assessment of algorithm
performance by considering different confidence criteria. The AP is determined by comput-
ing the average of accuracy values at various recall levels. This metric effectively represents
the balance between making precise positive predictions and including all positive cases.
This statistic offers a nuanced viewpoint on the capabilities of a system, particularly in
situations when datasets are unbalanced or object class distributions fluctuate. The utiliza-
tion of AP facilitates the thorough evaluation of the system’s efficiency in detecting and
recognizing traffic signs. This, in turn, fosters the advancement of traffic sign recognition
systems that are both resilient and adaptable, capable of performing exceptionally well
under various operational circumstances. AP is provided by the following expression:
n
1
AP =
npos ∑ (Recall(i) − Recall(i − 1)) · Precision(i) (8)
i =1

where npos is the total number of positive instances (ground truth objects), n is the total
number of thresholds at which precision and recall values are computed, recall(i ) represents
the recall value at threshold i, precision(i ) denotes the precision value at threshold i,
recall(0) = 0 and precision(0) can be set to 1 for convenience.
These metrics play a critical role in objectively evaluating the performance of traffic
sign recognition systems and facilitating comparisons between different approaches. How-
ever, the choice among metrics may vary based on specific applications and requirements,
and researchers should carefully select the most relevant metrics to assess the system’s
effectiveness in real-world scenarios.

3.4. Comparing Metrics among Different Versions of YOLO

A comprehensive analysis was conducted to compare various metrics by reviewing
selected research from 2016 to 2022 and computing the average values. This section
introduces a series of scatter plots that assess the efficacy of traffic sign detection and
recognition systems utilizing different versions of YOLO.
Figure 2a presents a scatter plot of FPS versus mAP, illustrating that YOLO’s FPS
ranges from 25 to 85. This range indicates its suitability as a real-time object detector.
Meanwhile, the mAP varies between 73% and 89%, with YOLOv5 emerging as the most
efficient version. This suggests that, while YOLO is a competitive detector, there is still
room for improvement.
A more detailed examination in Figure 2b reveals the relationship between ACC
and mAP. Here, YOLOv5 demonstrates the lowest ACC but the highest mAP. Conversely,
YOLOv2 shows the highest ACC with a comparatively lower mAP, partly due to the limited
number of studies reporting ACC data for this version.
In another perspective, Figure 3a–c show the box plots of the mAP, ACC, and FPS
metrics for the different versions of YOLO. YOLOv5 consistently outperforms in the
mAP metric, while YOLOv2 lags behind. In terms of ACC, YOLOv1 exhibits the highest
overall score, closely followed by YOLOv5. For the FPS metric, YOLOv5 again shows
superior performance.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 16 of 31

(a) FPS versus mAP.

(b) ACC versus mAP.

Figure 2. Scatter plots comparing FPS versus mAP and ACC versus mAP metrics, extracted from
scientific papers (2016–2022) to evaluate the performance of traffic sign detection and recognition
systems using YOLO. They consider average values.

Figure 4a shows the average value of the mAP, ACC, precision, recall, and F1 score
metrics, grouped across all YOLO versions. In all cases, there are high results, over 79%.
The best precision and recall values correspond to YOLOv5, and the best F1 score value is
from YOLOv3.
Then, Figure 4b shows in detail, for each of the YOLO versions, all the metrics.
YOLOv4 presents the best ACC value, followed by YOLOv2. In the case of the mAP metric,
YOLOv2 has the best performance. However, this is an isolated result because there is only
one article in this case.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 17 of 31

(a) mAP.

(b) ACC.

(c) FPS.

Figure 3. Box plots depicting the mAP, ACC, and FPS metrics extracted from scientific papers
(2016–2022), which evaluate the performance of traffic sign detection and recognition systems.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 18 of 31

(a) Overall average. (b) Average for each version.

Figure 4. Bar charts of evaluation metrics used in scientific papers to assess the quality of traffic sign
detection and recognition systems using YOLO in the period 2016–2022.

3.5. RQ4 [Hardware]: What Hardware Is Used to Implement Traffic Sign Recognition and
Detection Systems Based on YOLO?
The implementation of traffic sign detection and recognition systems using the YOLO
framework often necessitates hardware configurations that achieve a balance between
computing capacity and efficiency. The selection and arrangement of hardware components
may differ based on the specific application and its corresponding requirements. Graphics
Processing Units (GPUs) play a crucial role in expediting the inference procedure of deep
learning models such as YOLO. High-performance GPUs manufactured by prominent
corporations such as Nvidia are frequently employed for the purpose of real-time or near-
real-time inference. In certain instances, the precise GPUs employed may not be expressly
stated or readily discernible based on the accessible information. This underscores the
importance of thorough and precise reporting in both research and practical applications.
The inclusion of detailed hardware specifications is essential for the replication of results
and the effective implementation of these systems in diverse contexts.
Figure 5a offers a visual depiction of the prevalence of specific Nvidia GPU graphic
cards within a range of research articles. Each bar within the plot corresponds to distinct
Nvidia GPU models, and the height of each bar signifies the frequency with which each
model is employed in these articles. These data provide valuable insights for individuals
seeking to understand the prevalent usage of Nvidia GPUs in the realm of traffic sign
detection and recognition.
Embedded cards like Jetson, Raspberry Pi, and Xilinx Zynq have emerged as crucial
solutions in the field of traffic sign detection and recognition technologies. Embedded sys-
tems, which fall under the category of electronic devices, exhibit a remarkable equilibrium
between energy efficiency and processing capabilities, rendering them indispensable ele-
ments in the realm of road safety and intelligent transportation applications. The compact
nature and high computational capabilities of these devices allow for the implementation
of sophisticated CV algorithms in real time. This enables accurate identification and classi-
fication of traffic lights, signage, and road conditions. Moreover, the inherent adaptability
and integrated connection of these devices render them highly suitable for edge computing
and industrial automation purposes, thereby playing a significant role in the progress of
road safety and traffic optimization in urban as well as rural environments.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 19 of 31

(a) NVIDIA GPU models (b) Mobile/Embedded platforms

Figure 5. Horizontal bar charts of the frequency of computer systems present in scientific papers
focused on traffic sign detection and recognition systems by using YOLO in the period 2016–2022.

The visual representation in Figure 5b provides a graphical depiction of the preva-

lence of embedded GPU cards within the context of our study. Each bar in the graphical
representation corresponds to a unique model of mobile/embedded GPU card, and its
height is directly proportional to the frequency with which that specific GPU card model is
mentioned in the papers analyzed in this study.
Jetson Xavier NX is identified as the most often utilized embedded system, as evi-
denced by several scholarly sources [63,68,77,135]. Following closely behind are Jetson
Nano, which is also referenced in several academic articles [63,77,129], Jetson TX2 [41,79,140],
and Jetson Xavier AGX, which is mentioned in at least one academic source [77]. These
embedded systems are supported by Nvidia. Moreover, the utilization of Raspberry
Pi [37,46,98] and Xilinx ZYNQ [18] is also observed within the scope of
this investigation.
The fundamental differentiation between conventional GPU graphic cards and embed-
ded systems resides in their physical structure, operational capabilities, and appropriateness
for particular use cases. Conventional GPUs, which are primarily intended for producing
high-performance graphics, possess considerable computational capabilities. However,
they exhibit significant drawbacks, such as their bulky size, high power consumption, and
limited adaptability in power-constrained or space-restricted settings. On the other hand,
embedded systems, which are characterized by their compactness and energy efficiency,
are specifically designed to excel in edge computing applications, such as the detection
of traffic signs. These systems prioritize real-time processing capabilities and low power
consumption as critical factors for optimal performance. Integrated sensors and numerous
communication possibilities are frequently included in these devices, hence augmenting
their use for many applications, such as intelligent transportation systems and road safety.

3.6. RQ5 [Challenges]: What Are the Challenges Encountered in the Detection and Recognition of
Traffic Signs Using YOLO?
The examination carried out in the domain of traffic sign identification and recognition
has shown seven noteworthy obstacles. These factors include variations in lighting settings,
unfavorable weather conditions, partial occlusion, damage to signs, intricate scenarios,
insufficient image quality, and concerns pertaining to geographical regions. In order to
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 20 of 31

efficiently address and classify these challenges, they have been assigned the designations
CH1 through CH7.
[CH1] Fluctuation in Lighting Conditions. The fluctuation in lighting conditions inside
road surroundings poses a significant obstacle in the accurate detection and recognition
of traffic signs. The issue at hand is a result of the fluctuating illumination levels expe-
rienced on roadways, which have a direct influence on the comprehensibility of traffic
signs. In conditions of reduced illumination, signage may exhibit diminished visibility,
hence augmenting the potential for accidents. Conversely, under conditions of extreme
illumination, such as exposure to direct sunlight or the presence of headlights emitted
by other cars, the phenomenon of glare may manifest, impeding the observer’s ability
to accurately discern and interpret signage. The presence of lighting variability can give
rise to unforeseeable shadows and contrasts on signage, obstructing crucial details and
adding complexity to their identification. Automatic sign identification systems that rely on
CV may encounter challenges when operating in environments with varying illumination
conditions, particularly in the context of autonomous driving. In order to tackle these
issues, researchers have created sophisticated technologies, including image enhancement
algorithms, night vision systems, and adaptive image processing approaches. The field
of sign technology has witnessed notable advancements, including the introduction of
retroreflective signs that enhance their detectability in conditions of reduced illumination.
The aforementioned solutions aim to alleviate the effects of lighting unpredictability on the
safety of road users.
[CH2] Adverse Weather Conditions. One of the significant challenges in the field of
traffic sign recognition and detection pertains to the mitigation of poor weather conditions.
These conditions include heavy rainfall, dense fog, frozen precipitation in the form of
snowfall, and dust storms, among several other weather phenomena. These atmospheric
occurrences result in reduced visibility, which consequently affects the accuracy of images
acquired by the sensors incorporated inside these devices. As a result, the effectiveness of
detecting and recognizing traffic signs is degraded, which has significant ramifications for
road safety and the operational efficiency of autonomous driving systems. Therefore, it is
crucial to address this difficulty and develop robust procedures that can operate well in all
weather situations.
[CH3] Partial Occlusion. The issue of partial occlusion in the field of traffic sign
recognition and detection pertains to the circumstance in which a notable portion of a
traffic sign becomes occluded or concealed by other items within the scene. The presence of
parked vehicles, trees, buildings, or other features in the road environment can contribute
to this phenomenon. The presence of partial occlusion poses a significant obstacle for
CV systems that are responsible for accurately detecting and categorizing traffic signs.
This is due to the fact that the available visual data may be inadequate or corrupted. The
resolution of this issue necessitates the creation of algorithms and methodologies with the
ability to identify and categorize traffic signs, even in situations where they are partially
obscured. This is of utmost importance in enhancing both road safety and the efficacy of
driver assistance systems.
[CH4] Sign Damage. The issue of sign damage within the domain of traffic sign
recognition and detection pertains to the physical degradation or deterioration of road
signs. This degradation can impede the accurate identification and categorization of signs
by automated systems. These phenomena can be attributed to a range of circumstances,
encompassing severe weather conditions, acts of vandalism, vehicular crashes, and other
manifestations of natural deterioration. The existence of signs that are damaged or illegible
is a notable obstacle for algorithms designed to recognize traffic signs as their capacity to
comprehend and analyze the information conveyed by the sign is undermined. Hence, it is
imperative to address the issue of sign degradation in order to guarantee the efficiency and
dependability of driving assistance and road safety systems that rely on automatic traffic
sign identification.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 21 of 31

[CH5] Complex Scenarios. The examination of traffic sign recognition and detection
in intricate settings poses considerable difficulties owing to the existence of numerous
signs with backgrounds that are challenging to distinguish, as well as instances where
multiple signs may seem like a unified entity. The intricate nature of these circumstances
presents a significant challenge for CV systems designed to automatically read traffic
signs in dynamic and diverse settings. The presence of many traffic signs within the
visual range of a detection system poses a significant obstacle. In scenarios characterized
by heavy traffic or intricate crossings, it is common for multiple lights to overlap or be
situated in close proximity to one another. The presence of this overlap has the potential
to introduce confusion to the detection system, leading to the misidentification of signs
or the inadvertent deletion of certain signs. Moreover, intricate backgrounds, such as
densely vegetated areas or the existence of items within the surrounding environment,
might provide visual interference that poses challenges in effectively distinguishing the
sign from the background. Another significant problem pertains to the system’s capacity
to differentiate between various signs that could initially appear as a unified entity. This
phenomenon may occur as a result of physical overlap or the simultaneous presence of
signs exhibiting identical form and color patterns. An erroneous understanding of sign
merging can lead to significant ramifications in relation to both the safety of road users and
the overall efficiency of traffic flow.
[CH6] Inadequate Image Quality. The issue pertaining to inadequate image quality
poses a substantial constraint within the domain of traffic sign recognition and detection.
This difficulty pertains to the existence of photographs that exhibit insufficient resolution,
noise, or visual deterioration, hence impeding the accurate identification and categorization
of traffic signs. The presence of substandard photos can be attributed to a range of cir-
cumstances, including unfavorable lighting conditions, obstructions, significant distances
between the camera and the subject, or inherent constraints of the employed capture tech-
nologies. The presence of adverse conditions has the potential to undermine the accuracy
and dependability of recognition algorithms. This highlights the significance of developing
resilient strategies that can effectively handle such images within the domain of traffic sign
recognition and detection.
[CH7] Geographic Regions. The study of traffic sign recognition and detection is
influenced by various complexities that are inherent to different geographic regions. The
intricacies arise from the variety of approaches to road infrastructure design and develop-
ment, as well as the cultural disparities deeply rooted in various communities.
One major challenge is the presence of disparities in the placement and design of
traffic signs. Various geographic regions may adopt distinct strategies when it comes
to the placement, dimensions, and color schemes employed in signs. The extent of this
heterogeneity might span from minor variations in typographic elements to significant
alterations in the emblematic icons. Hence, it is crucial that recognition systems pos-
sess the necessary flexibility to handle such variability and effectively read a wide range
of indicators.
The existence of divergent traffic laws and regulations across different locations
presents significant issues. There can be variations in traffic regulations and signaling
rules, which can have a direct impact on the interpretation and enforcement of traffic signs.
Hence, it is imperative for recognition systems to possess the capability of integrating a
wide range of regulations and to be developed in a manner that can adapt to requirements
specific to different regions.
Table 3 presents a full summary of each challenge, along with the related articles
that advocate for them. After conducting a comprehensive analysis, a range of solutions
employed by diverse writers have been identified. The solutions can be categorized into
three primary groups: SOL1 studies, which actively propose solutions to the identified
problems; SOL2 studies, which acknowledge the issues but do not provide specific remedies;
and SOL3 studies, which provide information about datasets without directly addressing
the challenges at hand.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 22 of 31

From Table 3, it can seen that challenges Ch1, Ch2, and Ch2 are the most addressed
with direct and specific solutions. On the contrary, challenges Ch2 to Ch7 are not addressed
by any researcher.

Table 3. Thorough analysis of challenges and corresponding solutions explored in scientific papers
addressing traffic sign detection systems in the period 2016–2022.

Challenge Sol1 Sol2 Sol3

[13,18,35,39,46,49,50,52,59,61,62, [7,12,36,42,43,47,48,54–
CH1 Fluctuation in 65,67,71,76–78,80–82,85,89,90,97, 58,60,63,64,66,68,70,72– [8,9,37,53,69,79,87,88,93,94,96,108,
lighting conditions 98,100,101,105,106,109,113,114, 74,84,86,91,92,99,104,107,110,112, 118,121,126,129,139]
117,124,125,127,130,134,136,141] 115,122,123,128,137,138]
[10,13,18,22,35,39,46,49–
[7,11,36,38,40–43,45,47,54,55,58,
CH2 Adverse 52,61,62,65,67,71,76–78,81–83,85,
63,64,66,68,73,84,91,92,95,97,104, –
weather conditions 90,98,100,103,105,109,113,114,117,
112,115,128,133,140]
120,124,125,127,130,134,136,141]
[7,36,40,41,43,45,47,56–
[13,18,22,35,46,51,52,61,62,65,67,
58,60,64,66,70,73,74,84,86,95,99,
CH3 Partial occlusion 78,80,82,85,90,100,101,103,109,127, –
104,106,107,110,112,113,119,123,
130]
132,134,137,138]
CH4 Sign Damage [13,18,35,61,65,70,85,101] [41,45,63,66,74,84,99,110,113,123] –
[13,18,35,38,39,51,52,62,76,78,80,
[41,48,55,60,66,74,84,102,123,131,
CH5 Complex Scenarios 81,83,89,90,95,103,105,109,111,112, –
133]
116,124,130,134]
[13,18,22,35,39,42,62,64,70,71,78,
CH6 Inadequate [7,36,40,41,45,47,58,63,66,84,91,
81–83,105,109,114,117,120,124,130, –
image quality 106,113,123,131,135,137]
134]
CH7 Geographic regions – [36,38,56,57,60,75,92] –

3.7. Discussion
This study presents an SLR on the utilization of YOLO technology for the purpose of
object detection within the domain of traffic sign detection and recognition. This review
offers a detailed examination of prospective applications, datasets, essential metrics, hard-
ware considerations, and challenges associated with this technology. This section provides
an analysis of the primary discoveries and implications of the SLR.
The measurement of FPS holds significant importance, particularly in dynamic set-
tings where prompt detection plays a vital role in alerting drivers to potential hazards or
infractions. It is imperative to strike a balance between accuracy and speed in real-time
applications.
The accessibility and caliber of datasets play a crucial role in the training and assess-
ment of object detection algorithms. The review elucidates the difficulties encountered in
the process of data normalization, the discrepancies in data quality across different authors,
and the insufficient amount of information available for certain datasets. The TTK1000
China dataset is notable for its comprehensive representation of traffic signs, categories, and
authentic driving scenarios. The USA BDD100K dataset provides a comprehensive compi-
lation of traffic signs, encompassing a diverse array of lighting situations. Nevertheless,
the analysis of these datasets necessitates substantial computational resources.
From a pragmatic perspective, the German databases, although moderately sized, are
extensively employed. These datasets provide a diverse range of traffic signs and categories,
hence enhancing their suitability for experimental purposes.
In the realm of hardware considerations, the fundamental importance lies in the
utilization of efficient algorithms that exhibit lower energy consumption and robustness
in contexts with limited memory capacity. It is advisable to minimize redundancy in the
quantity of layers inside neural networks. The effective dissipation of heat is of utmost
importance in mitigating the risk of overheating, particularly in the context of mobile
graphics processing unit (GPU) systems. It is worth mentioning that NVIDIA presently
holds a dominant position in the market for mobile GPU systems.
Examining the challenges, this review emphasizes the necessity of conducting research
that focuses on sign degradation, which is a crucial but frequently disregarded element
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 23 of 31

in the field of traffic sign detection and recognition. The failure to consider the presence
of damaged signs may result in the generation of incorrect detections and the probable
occurrence of hazardous circumstances on the roadway. Tackling this difficulty not only
improves the resilience of algorithms but also contributes to the broader goal of developing
more reliable traffic sign recognition systems.
Another notable difficulty that has been emphasized is the lack of research studies
that specifically examine the geographical disparities in the detection and recognition
of traffic signs. Geographical variations can introduce unique complexities, including
diverse traffic sign designs, language differences, and local regulations. Failing to account
for these nuances can severely limit the effectiveness and applicability of traffic sign
detection systems across diverse regions. This observation underscores the pressing need
for targeted research efforts in this area. By addressing this challenge, we not only enhance
the robustness and adaptability of our detection systems but also contribute to safer and
more reliable transportation networks on a global scale.
Lastly, the SLR emphasizes the broad applications of YOLO technology in traffic-
related contexts. It serves as a pivotal tool in preventing traffic accidents by providing
early warnings of potential issues during driving. Additionally, it can be integrated with
GPS systems for infrastructure maintenance, allowing for real-time assessment of road
sign quality. Moreover, YOLO technology plays a foundational role in the development of
autonomous vehicles.

3.8. Possible Threats to SLR Validation

This section will discuss the threats that may affect this SLR, and how they have
been resolved.

3.9. Construct Validity Threat

During our comprehensive investigation of research papers centered on YOLO for
the detection and recognition of traffic signs, we recognized a number of possible chal-
lenges to the soundness of our findings, mostly emanating from the presumptions made
throughout the evaluation procedure. In order to ensure the trustworthiness and appro-
priate interpretation of the presented findings, it is crucial to acknowledge and tackle
these constraints.

3.9.1. The Influence of Version Bias on Metrics

Threat: The potential bias in the metrics arises from the inclusion of different versions
of YOLO in the collected research, with the assumption that newer versions of YOLO are
intrinsically more efficient.
Mitigation: This review acknowledges the variations in YOLO versions but assumes
that the metrics presented in various research may be compared, regardless of the specific
YOLO version used. Nevertheless, it is imperative to recognize the potential impact of
differences in versions on the documented performance measures.

3.9.2. Geographic Diversity in Sign Datasets

Threat: The inclusion of traffic sign datasets from various geographical locations may
generate unpredictability in the reported performance of the YOLO algorithm, thereby
affecting the applicability of the findings.
Mitigation: Despite acknowledging the constraint of dataset origin diversity, we make
the assumption of comparability in performance indicators across various research. Never-
theless, it is important to acknowledge the potential influence of geographical variations
on the performance of YOLO, hence underscoring the necessity for careful interpretation.

3.9.3. Hardware Discrepancies

Threat: The presence of disparities in hardware utilization among studies may result
in variations in the time performance of the detection and recognition systems. This
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 24 of 31

assumption is based on the idea that newer versions of YOLO use greater hardware
resources and that more advanced hardware leads to quicker response times.
Mitigation: The underlying premise of our study is that the comparability of results
holds true across experiments conducted with varying hardware setups. However, it is
important to identify and take into consideration the potential impact of hardware changes
on the reported time performance in this assessment.

3.9.4. Limitations of Statistical Metrics

Threat: Relying on a single statistical summary metric to measure YOLO’s capability
for traffic sign detection may not fully capture the system’s performance.
Mitigation: Despite this limitation, our main premise argues that the selected metrics
enable the comparability of various YOLO systems and adequately assess their overall
effectiveness. Acknowledging the inherent limitations of statistical summaries is imperative
when attempting to conduct a thorough assessment of detection and identification systems.
Our goal is to improve the clarity and reliability of our review’s interpretation by
openly acknowledging these potential threats to construct validity. This provides a more
nuanced understanding of the limitations associated with the diverse aspects of YOLO
techniques for traffic sign detection and recognition.

3.9.5. Threats to Internal Validation

The greatest threat that this SLR has faced is the number of studies collected. A total
of 115 articles have been analyzed, selected in the period from 2016 to 2022, which are in
the category of “Journal” or “Conferences”. On the other hand, there are articles about to
be published in 2023, which have not yet been analyzed.

3.9.6. Threats to External Validation

In this study, only the data contained in the previously selected articles have been
collected and analyzed; that is, no experimentation has been carried out with traffic sign
detection, recognition, and identification systems, so our own experimental data have not
been compared with those provided by the different researchers.

3.9.7. Threats to the Validation of the Conclusions

The documents studied have been compiled from nine world-renowned publishers,
but valuable information has only been available from seven of them. Likewise, works
published in other publishers (ACM), in pre-prints (arXiv), in patent bases (EPO, Google
Patents), or technology companies (VisLab, Continental) have been omitted. Consequently,
no literature has been collected from these sources. Obviously, ignoring this literature leads
to the notion that sign detection and recognition systems traffic may be more advanced than
presented in this study. Therefore, conclusions based on 115 studies may not adequately
present the progress of detection, recognition, and identification systems of traffic signs
using YOLO in the period 2016 to 2022.

3.10. Future Research Directions

This study suggests that, despite the potential benefits of traffic sign detection and
recognition systems as a technology with the potential to reduce traffic accidents and
contribute to the development of autonomous vehicles, specific barriers such as extreme
weather conditions, lack of standardized databases, and insufficient criteria for choosing
the object detector are the main problems that need to be addressed. Thus, the following
questions arise:
• What is the performance of traffic sign detection and recognition systems under
extreme weather conditions?
• How could datasets for the development of traffic sign detection and recognition
systems be standardized?
• What is the best object detector to be used in traffic sign detection and recognition systems?
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 25 of 31

Future research will be initiated based on the answers to these questions, which will
include new versions of YOLO, e.g., v6, v7, v8, and NAS.

4. Conclusions
This study presents a comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of the utilization of the
YOLO object detection algorithm in the field of traffic sign detection and recognition for the
period from 2016 to 2022. The review also offers an analysis of applications, sign datasets,
effectiveness assessment measures, hardware technologies, challenges faced in this field,
and their potential solutions.
The results emphasize the extensive use of the YOLO object detection algorithm as a
popular method for detecting and identifying traffic indicators, particularly in fields such
as vehicular security and intelligent autonomous vehicles.
The accessibility and usefulness of the YOLO object detection algorithm are under-
scored by the existence of publicly accessible datasets that may be used for training, testing,
and validating YOLO-based systems.
In addition, the analysis is enhanced by considering the prevailing hardware options,
specifically the widespread utilization of Nvidia RTX2080 and Testa V100 for data pro-
cessing, and Jetson Javier NX for embedded applications, which adds a practical aspect to
the evaluation.
However, a notable deficiency in the existing body of research pertains to the examina-
tion of geographical discrepancies and environmental factors, along with the difficulties
presented by deteriorated, obscured, blurred, or unclear traffic signs.
The acquisition of this knowledge bears substantial importance for researchers and
practitioners undertaking projects that involve the implementation of the YOLO object
detection algorithm in the fields of traffic sign detection and recognition.

Author Contributions: M.F.-C.: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition,
investigation, methodology, validation, visualization, writing—original draft, project administration,
supervision, and writing—review and editing; D.G., J.M., B.S.L., B.D. and J.S.A.: data curation
and formal analysis; C.A.A.: methodology, supervision, and writing—review and editing; D.Z.-B.:
supervision and writing—review; J.M.A.M.: supervision and funding acquisition. All authors gave
final approval for publication and agreed to be held accountable for the work performed herein. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding, and the APC was funded by grants PID2019-
104793RB-C31, PdC2022-133684-C31, and PDC2021-1215-17-C31, funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/
501100011033.
Data Availability Statement: Data are contained within the article.
Acknowledgments: The authors wish to offer thanks to J. Yunda, from UCLouvain, and M. Pilla,
from CSIC, for their help in compiling the information, and to “the open source community” for all
the contributions.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

WHO World Health Organization

RTA Road Traffic Accidents
ADAS Advanced Driver Assistance Systems
DL Deep Learning
CV Computer Vision
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 26 of 31

YOLO You Look Only Once

GPU Graphics Processing Unit
SLR Systematic Literature Review
RQ Research question
FPS Frames per second
ACC Accuracy
AP Average Precision
mAP Mean Average Precision
F1 F1 Score
IoU Intersection over Union
WoS Web of Science

References
1. Yu, G.; Wong, P.K.; Zhao, J.; Mei, X.; Lin, C.; Xie, Z. Design of an Acceleration Redistribution Cooperative Strategy for Collision
Avoidance System Based on Dynamic Weighted Multi-Objective Model Predictive Controller. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst.
2022, 23, 5006–5018. [CrossRef]
2. World Health Organization (WHO). Global Status Report on Road Safety 2018. Available online: https://www.who.int/
publications/i/item/WHO-NMH-NVI-18.20/ (accessed on 1 September 2022).
3. Statista. Road Accidents in the United States-Statistics & Facts. Available online: https://www.statista.com/topics/3708/road-
accidents-in-the-us/#dossierKeyfigures (accessed on 2 September 2022).
4. European Parliament. Road Fatality Statistics in the EU. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/
society/20190410STO36615/road-fatality-statistics-in-the-eu-infographic (accessed on 2 September 2022).
5. Liu, C.; Li, S.; Chang, F.; Wang, Y. Machine Vision Based Traffic Sign Detection Methods: Review, Analyses and Perspectives.
IEEE Access 2019, 7, 86578–86596. [CrossRef]
6. Jiang, P.; Ergu, D.; Liu, F.; Cai, Y.; Ma, B. A Review of YOLO algorithm developments. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2022, 199, 1066–1073.
[CrossRef]
7. Rajendran, S.P.; Shine, L.; Pradeep, R.; Vijayaraghavan, S. Fast and accurate traffic sign recognition for self driving cars using
retinanet based detector. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems
(ICCES), Coimbatore, India, 17–19 July 2019; pp. 784–790.
8. Yang, W.; Zhang, W. Real-time traffic signs detection based on YOLO network model. In Proceedings of the 2020 International
Conference on Cyber-Enabled Distributed Computing and Knowledge Discovery (CyberC), Chongqing, China, 29–30 October
2020; pp. 354–357.
9. Dewi, C.; Chen, R.C.; Liu, Y.T.; Jiang, X.; Hartomo, K.D. YOLO V4 for advanced traffic sign recognition with synthetic training
data generated by various GAN. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 97228–97242. [CrossRef]
10. Mijić, D.; Brisinello, M.; Vranješ, M.; Grbić, R. Traffic Sign Detection Using YOLOv3. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 10th
International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE-Berlin), Berlin, Germany, 9–11 November 2020; pp. 1–6.
11. Mohd-Isa, W.N.; Abdullah, M.S.; Sarzil, M.; Abdullah, J.; Ali, A.; Hashim, N. Detection of Malaysian Traffic Signs via Modified
YOLOv3 Algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Data Analytics for Business and Industry: Way
Towards a Sustainable Economy (ICDABI), Sakheer, Bahrain, 26–27 October 2020; pp. 1–5.
12. Avramović, A.; Sluga, D.; Tabernik, D.; Skočaj, D.; Stojnić, V.; Ilc, N. Neural-network-based traffic sign detection and recognition
in high-definition images using region focusing and parallelization. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 189855–189868. [CrossRef]
13. Gu, Y.; Si, B. A novel lightweight real-time traffic sign detection integration framework based on YOLOv4. Entropy 2022, 24, 487.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Expertos en Siniestros. Significado de las Señales de Tráfico en España. Available online: http://www.expertoensiniestros.es/
significado-senales-de-trafico-en-espana/ (accessed on 27 December 2019).
15. Gupta, A.; Anpalagan, A.; Guan, L.; Khwaja, A.S. Deep learning for object detection and scene perception in self-driving cars:
Survey, challenges, and open issues. Array 2021, 10, 100057. [CrossRef]
16. Diwan, T.; Anirudh, G.; Tembhurne, J.V. Object detection using YOLO: Challenges, architectural successors, datasets and
applications. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2022, 82, 9243–9275. [CrossRef]
17. Boukerche, A.; Hou, Z. Object Detection Using Deep Learning Methods in Traffic Scenarios. ACM Comput. Surv. 2022, 54, 1–35.
[CrossRef]
18. Ayachi, R.; Afif, M.; Said, Y.; Ben Abdelali, A. An edge implementation of a traffic sign detection system for Advanced Driver
Assistance Systems. Int. J. Intell. Robot. Appl. 2022, 6, 207–215. [CrossRef]
19. Gámez-Serna, C.; Ruichek, Y. Classification of Traffic Signs: The European Dataset. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 78136–78148. [CrossRef]
20. Almuhajri, M.; Suen, C. Intensive Survey About Road Traffic Signs Preprocessing, Detection and Recognition. In Advances in
Data Science, Cyber Security and IT Applications; Alfaries, A., Mengash, H., Yasar, A., Shakshuki, E., Eds.; Springer International
Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 275–289.
21. Redmon, J.; Divvala, S.; Girshick, R.; Farhadi, A. You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection. In Proceedings of the
IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 27–30 June 2016; pp. 779–788.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 27 of 31

22. Liu, C.; Tao, Y.; Liang, J.; Li, K.; Chen, Y. Object detection based on YOLO network. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 4th
Information Technology and Mechatronics Engineering Conference (ITOEC), Chongqing, China, 14–16 December 2018; pp.
799–803.
23. Redmon, J.; Farhadi, A. YOLO9000: Better, faster, stronger. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and
Pattern Recognition, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–26 July 2017; pp. 7263–7271.
24. Redmon, J.; Farhadi, A. YOLOv3: An Incremental Improvement. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1804.02767.
25. Redmon, J. Darknet: Open Source Neural Networks in C. Available online: https://pjreddie.com/darknet/ (accessed on 15
May 2023).
26. Bochkovskiy, A.; Wang, C.Y.; Liao, H.Y.M. YOLOv4: Optimal Speed and Accuracy of Object Detection. arXiv 2020,
arXiv:2004.10934.
27. Wang, C.Y. Scaled-YOLOv4: Scaling Cross Stage Partial Network. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer
Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Nashville, TN, USA, 20–25 June 2021.
28. Kasper-Eulaers, M.; Hahn, N.; Berger, S.; Sebulonsen, T.; Myrland, Ø.; Kummervold, P.E. Detecting heavy goods vehicles in rest
areas in winter conditions using YOLOv5. Algorithms 2021, 14, 114. [CrossRef]
29. Wali, S.B.; Abdullah, M.A.; Hannan, M.A.; Hussain, A.; Samad, S.A.; Ker, P.J.; Mansor, M.B. Vision-Based Traffic Sign Detection
and Recognition Systems: Current Trends and Challenges. Sensors 2019, 19, 2093. [CrossRef]
30. Borrego-Carazo, J.; Castells-Rufas, D.; Biempica, E.; Carrabina, J. Resource-Constrained Machine Learning for ADAS: A Systematic
Review. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 40573–40598. [CrossRef]
31. Muhammad, K.; Ullah, A.; Lloret, J.; Del Ser, J.; de Albuquerque, V.H.C. Deep Learning for Safe Autonomous Driving: Current
Challenges and Future Directions. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2020, 22, 4316–4336. [CrossRef]
32. Higgins, J.; Thomas, J.; Chandler, J.; Cumpston, M.; Li, T.; Page, M.; Welch, V. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of
Interventions Version 6.3 (Updated February 2022); Technical Report; Cochrane: London, UK, 2022.
33. Cardoso Ermel, A.P.; Lacerda, D.P.; Morandi, M.I.W.M.; Gauss, L. Literature Reviews; Springer International Publishing: Cham,
Switzerland, 2021. [CrossRef]
34. Mengist, W.; Soromessa, T.; Legese, G. Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental
science research. MethodsX 2020, 7, 100777. [CrossRef]
35. Tarachandy, S.M.; Aravinth, J. Enhanced Local Features using Ridgelet Filters for Traffic Sign Detection and Recognition. In
Proceedings of the 2021 Second International Conference on Electronics and Sustainable Communication Systems (ICESC),
Coimbatore, India, 4–6 August 2021; pp. 1150–1156.
36. Yan, W.; Yang, G.; Zhang, W.; Liu, L. Traffic Sign Recognition using YOLOv4. In Proceedings of the 2022 7th International
Conference on Intelligent Computing and Signal Processing (ICSP), Xi’an, China, 15–17 April 2022; pp. 909–913.
37. Kankaria, R.V.; Jain, S.K.; Bide, P.; Kothari, A.; Agarwal, H. Alert system for drivers based on traffic signs, lights and pedestrian
detection. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference for Emerging Technology (INCET), Belgaum, India, 5–7 June 2020;
pp. 1–5.
38. Ren, X.; Zhang, W.; Wu, M.; Li, C.; Wang, X. Meta-YOLO: Meta-Learning for Few-Shot Traffic Sign Detection via Decoupling
Dependencies. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 5543. [CrossRef]
39. Liu, Y.; Shi, G.; Li, Y.; Zhao, Z. M-YOLO: Traffic sign detection algorithm applicable to complex scenarios. Symmetry 2022, 14, 952.
[CrossRef]
40. Li, M.; Zhang, L.; Li, L.; Song, W. YOLO-based traffic sign recognition algorithm. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 2682921.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
41. Yao, Z.; Song, X.; Zhao, L.; Yin, Y. Real-time method for traffic sign detection and recognition based on YOLOv3-tiny with
multiscale feature extraction. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part D J. Automob. Eng. 2021, 235, 1978–1991. [CrossRef]
42. Vasanthi, P.; Mohan, L. YOLOV5 and Morphological Hat Transform Based Traffic Sign Recognition. In Rising Threats in Expert
Applications and Solutions; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 579–589.
43. Rodríguez, R.C.; Carlos, C.M.; Villegas, O.O.V.; Sánchez, V.G.C.; Domínguez, H.d.J.O. Mexican traffic sign detection and
classification using deep learning. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022, 202, 117247. [CrossRef]
44. Nandavar, S.; Kaye, S.A.; Senserrick, T.; Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. Exploring the factors influencing acquisition and learning
experiences of cars fitted with advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2023,
94, 341–352. [CrossRef]
45. Yang, T.; Tong, C. Small Traffic Sign Detector in Real-time Based on Improved YOLO-v4. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 23rd Int
Conf on High Performance Computing & Communications; 7th Int Conf on Data Science & Systems; 19th Int Conf on Smart City;
7th Int Conf on Dependability in Sensor, Cloud & Big Data Systems & Application (HPCC/DSS/SmartCity/DependSys), Haikou,
China, 20–22 December 2021; pp. 1318–1324.
46. William, M.M.; Zaki, P.S.; Soliman, B.K.; Alexsan, K.G.; Mansour, M.; El-Moursy, M.; Khalil, K. Traffic signs detection and
recognition system using deep learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 Ninth International Conference on Intelligent Computing
and Information Systems (ICICIS), Cairo, Egypt, 8–10 December 2019; pp. 160–166.
47. Hsieh, M.H.; Zhao, Q. A Study on Two-Stage Approach for Traffic Sign Recognition: Few-to-Many or Many-to-Many? In
Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics (ICMLC), Adelaide, Australia, 2
December 2020; pp. 76–81.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 28 of 31

48. Gopal, R.; Kuinthodu, S.; Balamurugan, M.; Atique, M. Tiny Object Detection: Comparative Study using Single Stage CNN
Object Detectors. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International WIE Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering
(WIECON-ECE), Bangalore, India, 15–16 November 2019; pp. 1–3.
49. Kavya, R.; Hussain, K.M.Z.; Nayana, N.; Savanur, S.S.; Arpitha, M.; Srikantaswamy, R. Lane Detection and Traffic Sign Recognition
from Continuous Driving Scenes using Deep Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 2nd International Conference on
Smart Electronics and Communication (ICOSEC), Trichy, India, 7–9 December 2021; pp. 1461–1467.
50. Rani, S.J.; Eswaran, S.U.; Mukund, A.V.; Vidul, M. Driver Assistant System using YOLO V3 and VGGNET. In Proceedings of the
2022 International Conference on Inventive Computation Technologies (ICICT), Lalitpur, Nepal, 20–22 July 2022; pp. 372–376.
51. Zhang, H.; Qin, L.; Li, J.; Guo, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Zhang, J.; Xu, Z. Real-time detection method for small traffic signs based on YOLOv3.
IEEE Access 2020, 8, 64145–64156. [CrossRef]
52. Garg, P.; Chowdhury, D.R.; More, V.N. Traffic sign recognition and classification using YOLOv2, Faster R-CNN and SSD. In
Proceedings of the 2019 10th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT),
Kanpur, India, 6–8 July 2019; pp. 1–5.
53. Devyatkin, A.; Filatov, D. Neural network traffic signs detection system development. In Proceedings of the 2019 XXII
International Conference on Soft Computing and Measurements (SCM)), St. Petersburg, Russia, 23–25 May 2019; pp. 125–128.
54. Ruta, A.; Li, Y.; Liu, X. Real-time traffic sign recognition from video by class-specific discriminative features. Pattern Recognit.
2010, 43, 416–430. [CrossRef]
55. Novak, B.; Ilić, V.; Pavković, B. YOLOv3 Algorithm with additional convolutional neural network trained for traffic sign
recognition. In Proceedings of the 2020 Zooming Innovation in Consumer Technologies Conference (ZINC), Novi Sad, Serbia,
26–27 May 2020; pp. 165–168.
56. Arief, R.W.; Nurtanio, I.; Samman, F.A. Traffic Signs Detection and Recognition System Using the YOLOv4 Algorithm. In
Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Mechatronics Systems (AIMS), Bandung, Indonesia,
28–30 April 2021; pp. 1–6.
57. Manocha, P.; Kumar, A.; Khan, J.A.; Shin, H. Korean traffic sign detection using deep learning. In Proceedings of the 2018
International SoC Design Conference (ISOCC), Daegu, Republic of Korea, 12–15 November 2018; pp. 247–248.
58. Rajendran, S.P.; Shine, L.; Pradeep, R.; Vijayaraghavan, S. Real-time traffic sign recognition using YOLOv3 based detector. In
Proceedings of the 2019 10th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT),
Kanpur, India, 6–8 July 2019; pp. 1–7.
59. Khan, J.A.; Yeo, D.; Shin, H. New dark area sensitive tone mapping for deep learning based traffic sign recognition. Sensors 2018,
18, 3776. [CrossRef]
60. Zhang, J.; Huang, M.; Jin, X.; Li, X. A real-time chinese traffic sign detection algorithm based on modified YOLOv2. Algorithms
2017, 10, 127. [CrossRef]
61. Seraj, M.; Rosales-Castellanos, A.; Shalkamy, A.; El-Basyouny, K.; Qiu, T.Z. The implications of weather and reflectivity variations
on automatic traffic sign recognition performance. J. Adv. Transp. 2021, 2021, 5513552. [CrossRef]
62. Du, L.; Ji, J.; Pei, Z.; Zheng, H.; Fu, S.; Kong, H.; Chen, W. Improved detection method for traffic signs in real scenes applied in
intelligent and connected vehicles. IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 2020, 14, 1555–1564. [CrossRef]
63. Ren, K.; Huang, L.; Fan, C.; Han, H.; Deng, H. Real-time traffic sign detection network using DS-DetNet and lite fusion FPN. J.
Real-Time Image Process. 2021, 18, 2181–2191. [CrossRef]
64. Khan, J.A.; Chen, Y.; Rehman, Y.; Shin, H. Performance enhancement techniques for traffic sign recognition using a deep neural
network. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2020, 79, 20545–20560. [CrossRef]
65. Zhang, J.; Ye1, Z.; Jin, X.; Wang, J.; Zhang, J. Real-time trafc sign detection based on multiscale attention and spatial information
aggregator. J. Real-Time Image Process. 2022, 19, 1155–1167. [CrossRef]
66. Karthika, R.; Parameswaran, L. A Novel Convolutional Neural Network Based Architecture for Object Detection and Recognition
with an Application to Traffic Sign Recognition from Road Scenes. Pattern Recognit. Image Anal. 2022, 32, 351–362. [CrossRef]
67. Chen, J.; Jia, K.; Chen, W.; Lv, Z.; Zhang, R. A real-time and high-precision method for small traffic-signs recognition. Neural
Comput. Appl. 2022, 34, 2233–2245. [CrossRef]
68. Wenze, Y.; Quan, L.; Zicheng, Z.; Jinjing, H.; Hansong, W.; Zhihui, F.; Neng, X.; Chuanbo, H.; Chang, K.C. An Improved
Lightweight Traffic Sign Detection Model for Embedded Devices. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced
Intelligent Systems and Informatics, Cairo, Egypt, 11–13 December 2021; pp. 154–164.
69. Lima, A.A.; Kabir, M.; Das, S.C.; Hasan, M.; Mridha, M. Road Sign Detection Using Variants of YOLO and R-CNN: An Analysis
from the Perspective of Bangladesh. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Big Data, IoT, and Machine Learning,
Cairo, Egypt, 20–22 November 2022; pp. 555–565.
70. Qin, Z.; Yan, W.Q. Traffic-sign recognition using deep learning. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Geometry and
Vision, Auckland, New Zealand, 28–29 January 2021; pp. 13–25.
71. Xing, J.; Yan, W.Q. Traffic sign recognition using guided image filtering. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on
Geometry and Vision, Auckland, New Zealand, 28–29 January 2021; pp. 85–99.
72. Hussain, Z.; Md, K.; Kattigenahally, K.N.; Nikitha, S.; Jena, P.P.; Harshalatha, Y. Traffic Symbol Detection and Recognition System.
In Emerging Research in Computing, Information, Communication and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022;
pp. 885–897.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 29 of 31

73. Chniti, H.; Mahfoudh, M. Designing a Model of Driving Scenarios for Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management, Singapore, 6–8 August 2022; pp. 396–405.
74. Dewi, C.; Chen, R.C.; Yu, H. Weight analysis for various prohibitory sign detection and recognition using deep learning. Multimed.
Tools Appl. 2020, 79, 32897–32915. [CrossRef]
75. Dewi, C.; Chen, R.C.; Jiang, X.; Yu, H. Deep convolutional neural network for enhancing traffic sign recognition developed on
Yolo V4. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2022, 81, 37821–37845. [CrossRef]
76. Tran, A.C.; Dien, D.L.; Huynh, H.X.; Long, N.H.V.; Tran, N.C. A Model for Real-Time Traffic Signs Recognition Based on the
YOLO Algorithm–A Case Study Using Vietnamese Traffic Signs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Future Data
and Security Engineering, Nha Trang City, Vietnam, 27–29 November 2019; pp. 104–116.
77. Güney, E.; Bayilmiş, C.; Çakan, B. An implementation of real-time traffic signs and road objects detection based on mobile GPU
platforms. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 86191–86203. [CrossRef]
78. Saouli, A.; Margae, S.E.; Aroussi, M.E.; Fakhri, Y. Real-Time Traffic Sign Recognition on Sipeed Maix AI Edge Computing. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Systems for Sustainable Development, Tangier, Morocco,
21–26 December 2020; pp. 517–528.
79. Satılmış, Y.; Tufan, F.; Şara, M.; Karslı, M.; Eken, S.; Sayar, A. CNN based traffic sign recognition for mini autonomous vehicles.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems Architecture and Technology, Szklarska Poreba, Poland,
17–19 September 2018; pp. 85–94.
80. Wu, Y.; Li, Z.; Chen, Y.; Nai, K.; Yuan, J. Real-time traffic sign detection and classification towards real traffic scene. Multimed.
Tools Appl. 2020, 79, 18201–18219. [CrossRef]
81. Li, S.; Cheng, X.; Zhou, Z.; Zhao, B.; Li, S.; Zhou, J. Multi-scale traffic sign detection algorithm based on improved YOLO
V4. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), Macau, China,
18 September–12 October 2022; pp. 8–12.
82. Youssouf, N. Traffic sign classification using CNN and detection using faster-RCNN and YOLOV4. Heliyon 2022, 8, e11792.
[CrossRef]
83. Zou, H.; Zhan, H.; Zhang, L. Neural Network Based on Multi-Scale Saliency Fusion for Traffic Signs Detection. Sustainability
2022, 14, 16491. [CrossRef]
84. Yang, Z. Intelligent Recognition of Traffic Signs Based on Improved YOLO v3 Algorithm. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2022, 2022, 11. [CrossRef]
85. Zhao, W.; Danjing, L. Traffic sign detection research based on G- GhostNet-YOLOx model. In Proceedings of the IEEE 4th
International Conference on Civil Aviation Safety and Information Technology (ICCASIT), Dali, China, 12–14 October 2022.
86. Bai, W.; Zhao, J.; Dai, C.; Zhang, H.; Zhao, L.; Ji, Z.; Ganchev, I. Two Novel Models for Traffic Sign Detection Based on YOLOv5s.
Axioms 2023, 12, 160. [CrossRef]
87. Jiang, J.; Yang, J.; Yin, J. Traffic sign target detection method based on deep learning. In Proceedings of the 2021 International
Conference on Computer Information Science and Artificial Intelligence (CISAI), Kunming, China, 17–19 September 2021;
pp. 74–78.
88. Kumagai, K.; Goto, T. Improving Accuracy of Traffic Sign Detection Using Learning Method. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 4th
Global Conference on Life Sciences and Technologies (LifeTech), Osaka, Japan, 7–9 March 2022; pp. 318–319.
89. Yu, J.; Ye, X.; Tu, Q. Traffic Sign Detection and Recognition in Multiimages Using a Fusion Model With YOLO and VGG Network.
IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2022, 23, 16632–16642. [CrossRef]
90. Ćorović, A.; Ilić, V.; Ðurić, S.; Marijan, M.; Pavković, B. The real-time detection of traffic participants using YOLO algorithm. In
Proceedings of the 2018 26th Telecommunications Forum (TELFOR), Belgrade, Serbia, 20–21 November 2018; pp. 1–4.
91. Kong, S.; Park, J.; Lee, S.S.; Jang, S.J. Lightweight traffic sign recognition algorithm based on cascaded CNN. In Proceedings of
the 2019 19th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS), Jeju, Republic of Korea, 15–18 October
2019; pp. 506–509.
92. Song, W.; Suandi, S.A. TSR-YOLO: A Chinese Traffic Sign Recognition Algorithm for Intelligent Vehicles in Complex Scenes.
Sensors 2023, 23, 749. [CrossRef]
93. Kumar, V.A.; Raghuraman, M.; Kumar, A.; Rashid, M.; Hakak, S.; Reddy, M.P.K. Green-Tech CAV: NGreen-Tech CAV: Next
Generation Computing for Traffic Sign and Obstacle Detection in Connected and Autonomous Vehicles. IEEE Trans. Green
Commun. Netw. 2022, 6, 1307–1315. [CrossRef]
94. Liu, X.; Jiang, X.; Hu, H.; Ding, R.; Li, H.; Da, C. Traffic Sign Recognition Algorithm Based on Improved YOLOv5s. In Proceedings
of the 2021 International Conference on Control, Automation and Information Sciences (ICCAIS), Xi’an, China, 14–17 October
2021; pp. 980–985.
95. Wang, H.; Yu, H. Traffic sign detection algorithm based on improved YOLOv4. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 9th Joint
International Information Technology and Artificial Intelligence Conference (ITAIC), Chongqing, China, 11–13 December 2020;
Volume 9, pp. 1946–1950.
96. Rehman, Y.; Amanullah, H.; Shirazi, M.A.; Kim, M.Y. Small Traffic Sign Detection in Big Images: Searching Needle in a Hay. IEEE
Access 2022, 10, 18667–18680. [CrossRef]
97. Alhabshee, S.M.; bin Shamsudin, A.U. Deep learning traffic sign recognition in autonomous vehicle. In Proceedings of the 2020
IEEE Student Conference on Research and Development (SCOReD), Batu Pahat, Malaysia, 27–29 September 2020; pp. 438–442.
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 30 of 31

98. Ikhlayel, M.; Iswara, A.J.; Kurniawan, A.; Zaini, A.; Yuniarno, E.M. Traffic Sign Detection for Navigation of Autonomous Car
Prototype using Convolutional Neural Network. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Computer Engineering,
Network, and Intelligent Multimedia (CENIM), Surabaya, Indonesia, 17–18 October 2020; pp. 205–210.
99. Jeya Visshwak, J.; Saravanakumar, P.; Minu, R. On-The-Fly Traffic Sign Image Labeling. In Proceedings of the 2020 International
Conference on Communication and Signal Processing (ICCSP), Chennai, India, 28–30 July 2020; pp. 0530–0532.
100. Valeja, Y.; Pathare, S.; Patel, D.; Pawar, M. Traffic Sign Detection using CLARA and YOLO in Python. In Proceedings of the 2021
7th International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS), Coimbatore, India, 19–20 March
2021; Volume 1, pp. 367–371.
101. Shahud, M.; Bajracharya, J.; Praneetpolgrang, P.; Petcharee, S. Thai traffic sign detection and recognition using convolutional
neural networks. In Proceedings of the 2018 22nd International Computer Science and Engineering Conference (ICSEC),
Chiang Mai, Thailand, 21–24 November 2018; pp. 1–5.
102. Chen, Y.; Wang, J.; Dong, Z.; Yang, Y.; Luo, Q.; Gao, M. An Attention Based YOLOv5 Network for Small Traffic Sign Recognition.
In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 31st International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE), Anchorage, AK, USA, 1–3 June
2022; pp. 1158–1164.
103. Park, Y.K.; Park, H.; Woo, Y.S.; Choi, I.G.; Han, S.S. Traffic Landmark Matching Framework for HD-Map Update: Dataset Training
Case Study. Electronics 2022, 11, 863. [CrossRef]
104. Rehman, Y.; Amanullah, H.; Saqib Bhatti, D.M.; Toor, W.T.; Ahmad, M.; Mazzara, M. Detection of Small Size Traffic Signs Using
Regressive Anchor Box Selection and DBL Layer Tweaking in YOLOv3. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 11555. [CrossRef]
105. Song, S.; Li, Y.; Huang, Q.; Li, G. A new real-time detection and tracking method in videos for small target traffic signs. Appl. Sci.
2021, 11, 3061. [CrossRef]
106. Zhang, S.; Che, S.; Liu, Z.; Zhang, X. A real-time and lightweight traffic sign detection method based on ghost-YOLO. In
Multimedia Tools and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; Volume 82, pp. 26063–26087.
107. Dewi, C.; Chen, R.C.; Tai, S.K. Evaluation of robust spatial pyramid pooling based on convolutional neural network for traffic
sign recognition system. Electronics 2020, 9, 889. [CrossRef]
108. Huang, H.; Liang, Q.; Luo, D.; Lee, D.H. Attention-Enhanced One-Stage Algorithm for Traffic Sign Detection and Recognition. J.
Sens. 2022, 2022, 3705256. [CrossRef]
109. Wan, H.; Gao, L.; Su, M.; You, Q.; Qu, H.; Sun, Q. A novel neural network model for traffic sign detection and recognition under
extreme conditions. J. Sens. 2021, 2021, 9984787. [CrossRef]
110. Zhu, Y.; Yan, W.Q. Traffic sign recognition based on deep learning. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2022, 81, 17779–17791. [CrossRef]
111. Li, Y.; Li, J.; Meng, P. Attention-YOLOV4: A real-time and high-accurate traffic sign detection algorithm. Multimed. Tools Appl.
2022, 82, 7567–7582. [CrossRef]
112. Zhang, Y.; Lu, Y.; Zhu, W.; Wei, X.; Wei, Z. Traffic sign detection based on multi-scale feature extraction and cascade feature
fusion. J. Supercomput. 2022, 79, 2137–2152. [CrossRef]
113. Yang, T.; Tong, C. Real-time detection network for tiny traffic sign using multi-scale attention module. Sci. China Technol. Sci.
2022, 65, 396–406. [CrossRef]
114. Xing, J.; Nguyen, M.; Qi Yan, W. The Improved Framework for Traffic Sign Recognition Using Guided Image Filtering. SN
Comput. Sci. 2022, 3, 1–16. [CrossRef]
115. Bi, Z.; Xu, F.; Shan, M.; Yu, L. YOLO-RFB: An Improved Traffic Sign Detection Model. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Mobile Computing, Applications, and Services, Online, 22–24 July 2022; pp. 3–18.
116. Zeng, H. Real-Time Traffic Sign Detection Based on Improved YOLO V3. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on
Computer Engineering and Networks, Hechi, China, 21–25 October 2022; pp. 167–172.
117. Galgali, R.; Punagin, S.; Iyer, N. Traffic Sign Detection and Recognition for Hazy Images: ADAS. In Proceedings of the
International Conference on Image Processing and Capsule Networks, Bangkok, Thailand, 27–28 May 2021; pp. 650–661.
118. Mangshor, N.N.A.; Paudzi, N.P.A.M.; Ibrahim, S.; Sabri, N. A Real-Time Malaysian Traffic Sign Recognition Using YOLO
Algorithm. In Proceedings of the 12th National Technical Seminar on Unmanned System Technology 2020, Virtual, 27–28 October
2022; pp. 283–293.
119. Le, B.L.; Lam, G.H.; Nguyen, X.V.; Duong, Q.L.; Tran, Q.D.; Do, T.H.; Dao, N.N. A Deep Learning Based Traffic Sign Detection for
Intelligent Transportation Systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Data and Social Networks,
Online, 15–17 November 2021; pp. 129–137.
120. Ma, L.; Wu, Q.; Zhan, Y.; Liu, B.; Wang, X. Traffic Sign Detection Based on Improved YOLOv3 in Foggy Environment. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless Communications, Networking and Applications, Wuhan, China,
16–18 December 2022; pp. 685–695.
121. Fan, W.; Yi, N.; Hu, Y. A Traffic Sign Recognition Method Based on Improved YOLOv3. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Intelligent Automation and Soft Computing, Chicago, IL, USA, 26–28 May 2021; pp. 846–853.
122. Tao, X.; Li, H.; Deng, L. Research on Self-driving Lane and Traffic Marker Recognition Based on Deep Learning. In Proceedings
of the International Symposium on Intelligence Computation and Applications, Giangzhou, China, 20–21 November 2021;
pp. 112–123.
123. Dewi, C.; Chen, R.C.; Yu, H.; Jiang, X. Robust detection method for improving small traffic sign recognition based on spatial
pyramid pooling. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 2021, 14, 8135–8152. [CrossRef]
Mathematics 2024, 12, 297 31 of 31

124. Wan, J.; Ding, W.; Zhu, H.; Xia, M.; Huang, Z.; Tian, L.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, H. An efficient small traffic sign detection method based
on YOLOv3. J. Signal Process. Syst. 2021, 93, 899–911. [CrossRef]
125. Peng, E.; Chen, F.; Song, X. Traffic sign detection with convolutional neural networks. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Cognitive Systems and Signal Processing, Beijing, China, 19–23 November 2016; pp. 214–224.
126. Thipsanthia, P.; Chamchong, R.; Songram, P. Road Sign Detection and Recognition of Thai Traffic Based on YOLOv3. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Multi-disciplinary Trends in Artificial Intelligence, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
17–19 November 2019; pp. 271–279.
127. Arcos-Garcia, A.; Alvarez-Garcia, J.A.; Soria-Morillo, L.M. Evaluation of deep neural networks for traffic sign detection systems.
Neurocomputing 2018, 316, 332–344. [CrossRef]
128. Ma, X.; Li, X.; Tang, X.; Zhang, B.; Yao, R.; Lu, J. Deconvolution Feature Fusion for traffic signs detection in 5G driven unmanned
vehicle. Phys. Commun. 2021, 47, 101375. [CrossRef]
129. Khnissi, K.; Jabeur, C.B.; Seddik, H. Implementation of a Compact Traffic Signs Recognition System Using a New Squeezed
YOLO. Int. J. Intell. Transp. Syst. Res. 2022, 20, 466–482. [CrossRef]
130. Khafaji, Y.A.A.; Abbadi, N.K.E. Traffic Signs Detection and Recognition Using A combination of YOLO and CNN. In Proceedings
of the International Conference on Communication & Information Technologies (IICCIT-2022), Basrah, Iraq, 7–8 September 2022.
131. Yan, B.; Li, J.; Yang, Z.; Zhang, X.; Hao, X. AIE-YOLO: Auxiliary Information Enhanced YOLO for Small Object Detection. Sensors
2022, 22, 8221. [CrossRef]
132. He, X.; Cheng, R.; Zheng, Z.; Wang, Z. Small Object Detection in Traffic Scenes Based on YOLO-MXANet. Sensors 2021, 21, 7422.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
133. Wang, X.; Guo, J.; Yi, J.; Song, Y.; Xu, J.; Yan, W.; Fu, X. Real-Time and Efficient Multi-Scale Traffic Sign Detection Method for
Driverless Cars. Sensors 2022, 22, 6930. [CrossRef]
134. Wang, Y.; Bai, M.; Wang, M.; Zhao, F.; Guo, J. Multiscale Traffic Sign Detection Method in Complex Environment Based on
YOLOv4. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 15. [CrossRef]
135. Wang, J.; Chen, Y.; Dong, Z.; Gao, M. Improved YOLOv5 network for real-time multi-scale traffic sign detection. Neural Comput.
Appl. 2021, 35, 7853–7865. [CrossRef]
136. Yao, Y.; Han, L.; Du, C.; Xu, X.; Jiang, X. Traffic sign detection algorithm based on improved YOLOv4-Tiny. Signal Process. Image
Commun. 2022, 107, 116783. [CrossRef]
137. Doherty, J.; Gardiner, B.; Kerr, E.; Siddique, N.; Manvi, S.S. Comparative Study of Activation Functions and Their Impact on
the YOLOv5 Object Detection Model. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition and Artificial
Intelligence, Paris, France, 1–3 June 2022; pp. 40–52.
138. Lu, H.; Chen, T.; Shi, L. Research on Small Target Detection Method of Traffic Signs Improved Based on YOLOv3. In Proceedings
of the 2022 2nd International Conference on Consumer Electronics and Computer Engineering (ICCECE), Guangzhou, China,
14–16 January 2022; pp. 476–481.
139. Algorry, A.M.; García, A.G.; Wofmann, A.G. Real-time object detection and classification of small and similar figures in image
processing. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence
(CSCI), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 14–16 December 2017; pp. 516–519.
140. Kuo, Y.L.; Lin, S.H. Applications of deep learning to road sign detection in DVR images. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE
International Symposium on Measurement and Control in Robotics (ISMCR), Houston, TX, USA, 19–21 September 2019;
p. A2-1.
141. Abraham, A.; Purwanto, D.; Kusuma, H. Traffic Lights and Traffic Signs Detection System Using Modified You Only Look Once.
In Proceedings of the 2021 International Seminar on Intelligent Technology and Its Applications (ISITIA), Surabaya, Indonesia,
21–22 July 2021; pp. 141–146.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.