MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1790272602 · doi:10.1117/1.oe.54.7.070502

Multispectral index for the remote detection of human skin signatures

2015· article· en· W1790272602 on OpenAlexafffund
Gladimir V. G. Baranoski, Tenn F. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueOptical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMultispectral imageRemote sensingComputer scienceSnowSpectral signatureEnvironmental scienceMultispectral pattern recognitionReflectivityVegetation IndexPhotochemical Reflectance IndexVegetation (pathology)GeologyNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexOpticsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a multispectral index to assist the detection of human signatures in complex natural environments. Differently from previously proposed indices, it takes into account the spectral responses of human skin not only in the near infrared, but also in the visible region of the light spectrum. As a result, it can contribute to mitigate the chances of false alarms during time-critical search and rescue operations carried out in such environments. Our investigation is supported by the use of reflectance data measured for different skin specimens and natural materials such as sand, ocean water, melting snow, and forest vegetation. We believe that the observations reported in this work can be incorporated into the design of more effective procedures and devices for the differentiation of human targets from background materials commonly found in nature.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptical EngineeringSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207