MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982559331 · doi:10.1109/ictis.2019.8883540

Evaluation of Alternative Pre-trained Convolutional Neural Networks for Winter Road Surface Condition Monitoring

2019· article· en· W2982559331 on OpenAlexaff
Guangyuan Pan, Liping Fu, Ruifan Yu, Matthew Muresan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsGoogle (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkRoad surfaceComputer scienceChromatin structure remodeling (RSC) complexSnow removalSet (abstract data type)Deep learningArtificial intelligenceTransport engineeringComputer visionSnowEngineeringCivil engineeringMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real-time winter road surface condition (RSC) monitoring is of critical importance for both winter road maintenance operators and the travelling public. Accurate and timely RSC information during snow events can help maintenance operators to deliver better maintenance services, such as plowing and salting, for reduced costs and salt usage and improved level of service. With this information, the traveling public can make more informed decisions on whether or not to travel, where to go, and which highways to drive on. In our previous effort we have shown the potential of applying a pre-trained convolutional neural network (CNN) for automatically detecting winter road surface conditions based on images from fixed traffic/weather cameras or in-vehicle devices. This paper focuses on comparing the performance of four most successful CNN models available from the leaders of this technology, namely, VGG16 (Oxford University), ResNet50 (Microsoft), Inception-V3 (Google) and Xception (Google), for solving the RSC classification problem. The models were first customized with additional fully-connected layers of neurons for learning the specific features of the RSC images. The extended models were then trained with a low learning rate for fine-tuning by using a small set of RSC images. The models were tested using a hold-out set of images from cameras installed at different locations, showing highly encouraging results.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207