MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2815527801 · doi:10.1109/aqtr.2018.8402698

Remote measurement of body temperature for an indoor moving crowd

2018· article· en· W2815527801 on OpenAlexaff
Hamidreza Fallah Haghmohammadi, D. Necsulescu, Mehrnoosh Vahidi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfrared Thermography in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTemperature measurementEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper is to present an approach for processing infrared images and accomplishing automatic detection and path tracking of moving subjects with fever. The detection is based on two main features: the distinction between the geometry of a human face and other objects in the field of view of the camera and the temperature of the radiating object. These features are used for tracking the identified persons with fever. The position of camera with respect to direction of motion the walkers appeared to be critical in this process. Infrared thermography is a remote sensing technique used to measure temperature based on emitted infrared radiation, in this case from people in crowded environments. This application may be used for fever screening in major public places such as airports and hospitals. For this study, we first look at human body and objects in a line of view with different temperatures that would be higher than the normal human body temperature (37.8C at morning and 38.3C at evening). As part of the experimental study, two humans with different body temperatures walking a path were subjected to automatic fever detection applied for tracking the detected human with fever. The algorithm consists of image processing to threshold objects based on the temperature and template matching used for fever detection in a dynamic human environment.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrared Thermography in MedicineFrench-language works237,207