Supervised target detection and classification by training on augmented reality data
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A proof of concept for a model-less target detection and classification system for side-scan imagery is presented. The system is based on a supervised approach that uses augmented reality (AR) images for training computer added detection and classification (CAD/CAC) algorithms, which are then deployed on real data. The algorithms are able to generalise and detect real targets when trained on AR ones, with performances comparable with the state-of-the-art in CAD/CAC. To illustrate the approach, the focus is on one specific algorithm, which uses Bayesian decision and the novel, purpose-designed central filter feature extractors. Depending on how the training database is partitioned, the algorithm can be used either for detection or classification. Performance figures for these two modes of operation are presented, both for synthetic and real targets. Typical results show a detection rate of more that 95% and a false alarm rate of less than 5%. The proposed supervised approach can be directly applied to train and evaluate other learning algorithms and data representations. In fact, a most important aspect is that it enables the use of a wealth of legacy pattern recognition algorithms for the sonar CAD/CAC applications of target detection and target classification.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it