MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086844398 · doi:10.3390/s20185280

Remote Insects Trap Monitoring System Using Deep Learning Framework and IoT

2020· article· en· W3086844398 on OpenAlexaff
Balakrishnan Ramalingam, Sathian Pookkuttath, Braulio Félix Gómez, Charan Satya Chandra Sairam Borusu, Tey Wee Teng, Yokhesh Krishnasamy Tamilselvam

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDate Palm Research Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSingapore University of Technology and DesignAgency for Science, Technology and Research
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDeep learningObject detectionField (mathematics)Trap (plumbing)Internet of ThingsReal-time computingEmbedded systemPattern recognition (psychology)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insect detection and control at an early stage are essential to the built environment (human-made physical spaces such as homes, hotels, camps, hospitals, parks, pavement, food industries, etc.) and agriculture fields. Currently, such insect control measures are manual, tedious, unsafe, and time-consuming labor dependent tasks. With the recent advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Internet of things (IoT), several maintenance tasks can be automated, which significantly improves productivity and safety. This work proposes a real-time remote insect trap monitoring system and insect detection method using IoT and Deep Learning (DL) frameworks. The remote trap monitoring system framework is constructed using IoT and the Faster RCNN (Region-based Convolutional Neural Networks) Residual neural Networks 50 (ResNet50) unified object detection framework. The Faster RCNN ResNet 50 object detection framework was trained with built environment insects and farm field insect images and deployed in IoT. The proposed system was tested in real-time using four-layer IoT with built environment insects image captured through sticky trap sheets. Further, farm field insects were tested through a separate insect image database. The experimental results proved that the proposed system could automatically identify the built environment insects and farm field insects with an average of 94% accuracy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations96
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicDate Palm Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207