MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938910637 · doi:10.7451/cbe.2018.60.2.33

Understanding the requirements for a blind-spot monitoring system on tractors from the operator’s perspective

2018· article· en· W2938910637 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Biosystems Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Blind spotOperator (biology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unintentional run-overs occur because the operator of a tractor is unable to physically see all around the machine. Therefore, there is a need to devise an effective blind-spot monitoring system for tractors to prevent unintentional run-overs. The purpose of the study was to identify the locations of blind spots around two types of tractors (i.e., with and without a front-end loader), with the ultimate goal of conceptualizing a blind-spot monitoring system capable of eliminating all existing blind spots. Grids were constructed around all four sides of the tractors to determine the presence of blind spots for drivers of varying sitting height (i.e., 5th, 50th and 95th percentile male for erect and slumped postures) at four horizontal planes representing people of varying stature who might be in the vicinity of the tractor (i.e., standing male, standing female, standing child, kneeling adult). Generally, the proportion of markers not visible decreased as the sitting height increased. Differences between erect and slumped sitting postures were not statistically different suggesting this variable could be ignored in the assessment of blind spots around tractors. The proportion of the markers not visible to the operator varied from 0 to 34%, with higher values observed for the tractor with the front-end loader installed. Values were as high as 42% of the markers not visible for the condition where a passenger was present in the passenger/trainer seat. Use of the existing rear-view mirrors eliminated only a small fraction of the blind spot area around the tractors. Through trial and error, it was determined that five and eight cameras would be required to fully detect the entire blind spot area around the two tractors selected for this study. A blind-spot monitoring system composed of five or eight cameras would create substantial additional monitoring burden for the tractor operator and, therefore, is not a feasible solution. A hybrid blind-spot monitoring system consisting of cameras and proximity sensors warrants further investigation.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.148 · 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