Safety Monitoring and Evaluation of Construction Projects Based on Multi-sensor Fusion
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For most construction projects, the complex engineering environment, the backward data collection technology, and the unreasonable monitoring network have resulted in many problems in monitoring data such as lots of noise and missing data items, therefore, it is of great significance to study the safety monitoring system of construction projects based on wireless sensor network (WSN). For this reason, this paper proposed a construction safety monitoring and evaluation (CSME) model based on multi-sensor fusion. First, the system structure and data flow model of the construction safety monitoring system were constructed; then, combining with a multi-sensor deep fusion system which was built on physical and information systems, this paper designed a spectrum sensing algorithm for sensor signals within the construction area. After that, tempo-spatial correlation analysis was conducted on the monitoring data, and a multi-sensor monitoring network joint sparse (MSMN-JS) model was constructed, which realized reconstruction of missing data items. At last, this paper used experimental results to prove the application value of the algorithm model to the safety monitoring and evaluation of construction projects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it