MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

2021· article· en· W3182673766 on OpenAlexaff
Chen Chen, Zhenhua Zhu, Amin Hammad, Mohammad Akbarzadeh

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.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.021
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

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
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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computing in Civil EngineeringSame topicHand Gesture Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207