MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886459018 · doi:10.1109/civemsa.2018.8439984

Computer vision-assisted human-in-the-loop measurements: augmenting qualitative by increasing quantitative analytics for CI situational awareness

2018· article· en· W2886459018 on OpenAlexaff
Luke Russell, Rafik Goubran, Felix Kwamena

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituation awarenessComputer scienceResilience (materials science)Human–computer interactionHuman-in-the-loopField (mathematics)Agile software developmentComputer securityArtificial intelligenceRisk analysis (engineering)Real-time computingSoftware engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many infrastructure problems are reported by the public, yet this can result in human-in-the loop, qualitative measurements and lead to slow response times as quantitative data is needed. Cameras already exist in many settings such as smartphones, or moving objects such as UAV-mounted cameras. Since many critical infrastructure (CI) problems often are first noticed by the general public and then reported, their qualitative descriptions can then be accompanied with quantitative measurements by using the indirect measurement of parameters provided using machine vision. In this paper, the authors propose a framework using Agile IoT to add new modalities to already existing sensors (cameras) such as smartphone devices to determine additional parameters using machine vision. This can result in an increase in situational awareness, and meanwhile, response and repair times can decrease, then the overall infrastructure resilience increases. This has the potential to improve preventative maintenance and increase resilience by increasing situational awareness, so resources can be deployed quickly and efficiently where they are needed. This proposed framework can apply to multiple small infrastructure such as lighting standards, playground structures, signage, access gates and fences, electrical wires, and utility poles and its affixed hardware components. The paper shows a proof-of-concept application of this methodology to the concept of tilt detection, with lean determined from simulated and field images. Quick follow-up to problems at appropriate locations can increase system resilience by quickly enabling solving the problem.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207