MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using Hue, Saturation, and Value Color Space for Hydraulic Excavator Idle Time Analysis

2007· article· en· W2044772156 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing in Civil Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Object Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcavatorHueIdleTracingEngineeringColor spaceComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceReal-time computingSimulationImage (mathematics)Civil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate analyses of equipment idle time are crucial for the efficient utilization of construction equipment in large construction projects. The less idle time the equipment has, the higher productivity it can achieve. However, it is not feasible for field personnel to visually observe the operation of construction equipment all day. An image processing-based methodology is presented in this paper to automatically quantify the idle time of hydraulic excavators. The image color space (hue, saturation, and value), which shows significant advantages over the red, green, and blue color space in identifying and tracing hydraulic excavators, is used as the base for image segmentation and tracing algorithms. The changing centroid coordinates of an excavator in successive images taken at constant time intervals are used as indicators of movement. Experimental results show that the presented methodology has a promising application potential for effective equipment management in construction projects.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · 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