Forest Fire Recognition Based on Feature Extraction from Multi-View Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest fire recognition is important to the protection of forest resources. To effectively monitor forest fires, it is necessary to deploy multiple monitors from different angles. However, most of the traditional recognition models can only recognize single-source images. The neglection of multi-view images leads to a high false positive/negative rate. To improve the accuracy of forest fire recognition, this paper proposes a graph neural network (GNN) model based on the feature similarity of multi-view images. Specifically, the correlations (nodes) between multi-view images and library images were established to convert the input features of graph nodes into the correlation features between different images. Based on feature relationships, the image features in the library were updated to estimate the node similarity in the GNN model, improving the image recognition rate of our model. Furthermore, a fire area feature extraction method was designed based on image segmentation, aiming to simplify the complex preprocessing of images, and effectively extract the key features from images. By setting the threshold in the hue-saturation-value (HSV) color space, the fire area was extracted from the images, and the dynamic features were extracted from the continuous frames of the fire area. Experimental results show that our method recognized forest fires more effectively than the baselines, improving the recognition accuracy by 4%. In addition, the multi-source forest fire data experiment also confirms that our method could adapt to different forest fire scenes, and boast a strong generalization ability and anti-interference ability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".