MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057500293 · doi:10.1364/ao.43.000403

Target detection and recognition improvements by use of spatiotemporal fusion

2004· article· en· W2057500293 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

VenueApplied Optics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterArtificial intelligenceThresholdingComputer sciencePixelNoise (video)Computer visionConstant false alarm rateGaussian noiseSensor fusionPattern recognition (psychology)Object detectionFalse alarmRadarImage (mathematics)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We developed spatiotemporal fusion techniques for improving target detection and automatic target recognition. We also investigated real IR (infrared) sensor clutter noise. The sensor noise was collected by an IR (256 x 256) sensor looking at various scenes (trees, grass, roads, buildings, etc.). More than 95% of the sensor pixels showed near-stationary sensor clutter noise that was uncorrelated between pixels as well as across time frames. However, in a few pixels (covering the grass near the road) the sensor noise showed nonstationary properties (with increasing or decreasing mean across time frames). The natural noise extracted from the IR sensor, as well as the computer-generated noise with Gaussian and Rayleigh distributions, was used to test and compare different spatiotemporal fusion strategies. Finally, we proposed two advanced detection schemes: the double-thresholding the reverse-thresholding techniques. These techniques may be applied to complicated clutter situations (e.g., very-high clutter or nonstationary clutter situations) where the traditional constant-false-alarm-ratio technique may fail.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.192 · 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