MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604272310 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v31i2.19102

Crowdsensing Air Quality with Camera-Enabled Mobile Devices

2017· article· en· W2604272310 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

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNanyang Technological UniversityNational Research Foundation
KeywordsCrowdsensingComputer scienceAir quality indexScalabilityMobile deviceQuality (philosophy)AnalyticsReal-time computingArtificial intelligenceData miningData scienceDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crowdsensing of air quality is a useful way to improve public awareness and supplement local air quality monitoring data. However, current air quality monitoring approaches are either too sophisticated, costly or bulky to be used effectively by the mass. In this paper, we describe AirTick, a mobile app that can turn any camera enabled smart mobile device into an air quality sensor, thereby enabling crowdsensing of air quality. AirTick leverages image analytics and deep learning techniques to produce accurate estimates of air quality following the Pollutant Standards Index (PSI). We report the results of an initial experimental and empirical evaluations of AirTick. The AirTick tool has been shown to achieve, on average, 87% accuracy in day time operation and 75% accuracy in night time operation. Feedbacks from 100 test users indicate that they perceive AirTick to be highly useful and easy to use. Our results provide a strong positive case for the benefits of applying artificial intelligence techniques for convenient and scalable crowdsensing of air quality.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.244 · 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