MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006513205 · doi:10.1142/s0219519405001370

CLASSIFICATION OF HUMAN FACIAL AND AURAL TEMPERATURE USING NEURAL NETWORKS AND IR FEVER SCANNER: A RESPONSIBLE SECOND LOOK

2005· article· en· W2006513205 on OpenAlex
E. Y. K. Ng, Gregory Kaw

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanics in Medicine and Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsThermographyInfraredFalse positive rateThermal infraredMedicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) is a highly infectious disease caused by a coronavirus. Screening to detect potential SARS infected subject with elevated body temperature plays an important role in preventing the spread of SARS. The use of infrared (IR) thermal imaging cameras has thus been proposed as a non-invasive, speedy, cost-effective and fairly accurate means for mass blind screening of potential SARS infected persons. Infrared thermography provides a digital image showing temperature patterns. This has been previously utilized in the detection of inflammation and nerve dysfunctions. It is believed that IR cameras may potentially be used to detect subjects with fever, the cardinal symptom of SARS and avian influenza. The accuracy of the infrared system can, however, be affected by human, environmental, and equipment variables. It is also limited by the fact that the thermal imager measures the skin temperature and not the body core temperature. Thus, the use of IR thermal systems at various checkpoints for mass screening of febrile persons is scientifically unjustified such as what is the false negative rate and most importantly not to create false sense of security. This paper aims to study the effectiveness of infrared systems for its application in mass blind screening to detect subjects with elevated body temperature. For this application, it is critical for thermal imagers to be able to identify febrile from normal subjects accurately. Minimizing the number of false positive and false negative cases improves the efficiency of the screening stations. False negative results should be avoided at all costs, as letting a SARS infected person through the screening process may result in potentially catastrophic results. Hitherto, there is lack of empirical data in correlating facial skin with body temperature. The current work evaluates the correlations (and classification) between the facial skin temperatures to the aural temperature using the artificial neural network approach to confirm the suitability of the thermal imagers for human temperature screening. We show that the Train Back Propagation and Kohonen self-organizing map (SOM) can form an opinion about the type of network that is better to complement thermogram technology in fever diagnosis to drive a better parameters for reducing the size of the neural network classifier while maintaining good classification accuracy.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.310 · 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