MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2541762047 · doi:10.1109/icm.2011.6177362

An intelligent RFID checkout for stores

2011· article· en· W2541762047 on OpenAlexaff
M. A. Besbes, Habib Hamam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRFID technology advancements
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaymentComputer scienceDatabase transactionInvoiceIdentification (biology)Identity (music)Authentication (law)Computer securityLetter of creditRadio-frequency identificationAdvertisingQueueBusinessTelecommunicationsWorld Wide WebDatabaseComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we propose an intelligent RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) checkout to facilitate access and payment, to assist visually impaired people and to improve marketing strategy. To avoid saturated queues which we used to see in conventional stores remote identification of the customer and items is used to purchase the latter. Payment is then performed by to online payment or by ATM or credit cards. In addition, to ensure high performance and smooth operation of this checkout, we thought of seven major criteria namely: · Improving marketing strategy by displaying specific advertisement for each customer depending on the history of his previous purchases. · Vocally assisting vocally the visually impaired people (Vocal Messages: welcome, total, confirmation...) · Checking the validity of products during purchase process to avoid sales of expired unhealthy products · Adding a biometric security level by using fingerprints so that the customer can confirm his identity and validate his purchase. This makes steeling others' identity cards useless. · Enabling the customer performing the transaction faster by automatic online payment and sending electronic invoice to his inbox. · Offering to the owner the possibility to check and supervise the history of transactions via internet. · Saving energy by activating the RFID reader only if a user enters or leaves.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRFID technology advancementsFrench-language works237,207