MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011652879 · doi:10.1117/12.459568

<title>Flight testing the infrared eye prototype</title>

2002· article· en· W2011652879 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Benoît Ricard, Paul C. Chevrette, Mario Pichette

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionField of viewArtificial intelligenceSearch and rescueEye trackingNight visionIdentification (biology)Field (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Infrared (IR) Eye was developed with support from the National Search-and-Rescue Secretariat (NSS), in view of improving the efficiency of airborne search-and-rescue operations. The IR Eye concept is based on the human eye and uses simultaneously two fields of view to optimize area coverage and detection capability. It integrates two cameras: the first, with a wide field of view of 40 degree(s), is used for search and detection while the second camera, with a narrower field of view of 10 degree(s) for higher resolution and identification, is mobile within the wide field and slaved to the operator's line of sight by means of an eye-tracking system. The images from both cameras are fused and shown simultaneously on a standard high resolution CRT display unit, interfaced with the eye-tracking unit in order to optimize the man-machine interface. The system was flight tested using the Advanced System Research Aircraft (Bell 412 helicopter) from the Flight Research Laboratory of the National Research Council of Canada. This paper presents some results of the flight tests, indicates the strengths and deficiencies of the system, and suggests future improvements for an advanced system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207