MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Automatic Identification of Idling Reasons in Excavation Operations Based on Excavator–Truck Relationships

2021· article· en· W3182673766 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computing in Civil Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcavatorTruckEarthworksEngineeringIdentification (biology)ExcavationProductivityWork (physics)Transport engineeringAutomotive engineeringCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Excavators and trucks are important equipment for earthwork operations, which make major contributions to construction productivity. To control the work efficiency and productivity of earthwork equipment, computer vision (CV) methods have been proposed to monitor equipment operations from site surveillance videos. Existing methods can recognize equipment activities to estimate the working and idling times. Idling time is an important factor that influences equipment productivity; however, the causes of equipment idling have not been considered in previous CV methods. Therefore, this research proposes a method to identify the main causes of excavator and truck idling by analyzing their interactive operations. First, the activities of the excavators and trucks are identified using convolutional neural networks. Then, work groups of excavators and trucks are clustered. Finally, the relationships between each excavator and the surrounding trucks are analyzed to identify the potential reason for idling. The proposed method was validated with videos from several construction sites, and the results were promising.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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