MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202375650 · doi:10.1155/2021/7669438

Detection for Dangerous Goods Vehicles in Expressway Service Station Based on Surveillance Videos

2021· article· en· W3202375650 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kai Huang, Qinpei Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsService (business)Process (computing)Dangerous goodsComputer scienceWorkloadComputer securityReal-time computingTransport engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To improve the safety capabilities of expressway service stations, this study proposes a method for detecting dangerous goods vehicles based on surveillance videos. The information collection devices used in this method are the surveillance cameras that already exist in service stations, which allows for the automatic detection and position recognition of dangerous goods vehicles without changing the installation of the monitoring equipment. The process of this method is as follows. First, we draw an aerial view image of the service station to use as the background model. Then, we use inverse perspective mapping to process each surveillance video and stitch these videos with the background model to build an aerial view surveillance model of the service station. Next, we use a convolutional neural network to detect dangerous goods vehicles from the original images. Finally, we mark the detection result in the aerial view surveillance model and then use that model to monitor the service station in real time. Experiments show that our aerial view surveillance model can achieve the real-time detection of dangerous goods vehicles in the main areas of the service station, thereby effectively reducing the workload of the monitoring personnel.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207