MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3048409423 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2008.05735

Reliability of Decision Support in Cross-spectral Biometric-enabled Systems

2020· preprint· en· W3048409423 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Lai, Svetlana Yanushkevich, Vlad P. Shmerko

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsReliability (semiconductor)Computer scienceDecision support systemSituation awarenessFacial expressionFace (sociological concept)Artificial intelligenceSituational ethicsFacial recognition systemExpression (computer science)Machine learningRisk analysis (engineering)Pattern recognition (psychology)PsychologyEngineeringSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the evaluation of the performance of the decision support system that utilizes face and facial expression biometrics. The evaluation criteria include risk of error and related reliability of decision, as well as their contribution to the changes in the perceived operator's trust in the decision. The relevant applications include human behavior monitoring and stress detection in individuals and teams, and in situational awareness system. Using an available database of cross-spectral videos of faces and facial expressions, we conducted a series of experiments that demonstrate the phenomenon of biases in biometrics that affect the evaluated measures of the performance in human-machine systems.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicFace recognition and analysisFrench-language works237,207