Improvement of the model of object recognition in aero photographs using deep convolutional neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detection and recognition of objects in images is the main problem to be solved by computer vision systems. As part of solving this problem, the model of object recognition in aerial photographs taken from unmanned aerial vehicles has been improved. A study of object recognition in aerial photographs using deep convolutional neural networks has been carried out. Analysis of possible implementations showed that the AlexNet 2012 model (Canada) trained on the ImageNet image set (China) is most suitable for this problem solution. This model was used as a basic one. The object recognition error for this model with the use of the ImageNet test set of images amounted to 15 %. To solve the problem of improving the effectiveness of object recognition in aerial photographs for 10 classes of images, the final fully connected layer was modified by rejection from 1,000 to 10 neurons and additional two-stage training of the resulting model. Additional training was carried out with a set of images prepared from aerial photographs at stage 1 and with a set of VisDrone 2021 (China) images at stage 2. Optimal training parameters were selected: speed (step) (0.0001), number of epochs (100). As a result, a new model under the proposed name of AlexVisDrone was obtained. The effectiveness of the proposed model was checked with a test set of 100 images for each class (the total number of classes was 10). Accuracy and sensitivity were chosen as the main indicators of the model effectiveness. As a result, an increase in recognition accuracy from 7 % (for images from aerial photographs) to 9 % (for the VisDrone 2021 set) was obtained which has indicated that the choice of neural network architecture and training parameters was correct. The use of the proposed model makes it possible to automate the process of object recognition in aerial photographs. In the future, it is advisable to use this model at ground stations of unmanned aerial vehicle complex control when processing aerial photographs taken from unmanned aerial vehicles, in robotic systems, in video surveillance complexes and when designing unmanned vehicle systems
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".