MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215557120 · doi:10.1109/dcoss52077.2021.00063

A Reverse Turing Like Test for Quad-copters

2021· article· en· W3215557120 on OpenAlex
Ahmad Traboulsi, Michel Barbeau

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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTuring testDroneComputer scienceTuringArtificial intelligenceOperator (biology)Test (biology)Machine learningProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An important piece of information that anti-drone systems seek is whether a drone is autonomous or being operated by a human. In this work, we develop a reverse Turing test to find the answer. A reverse Turing test is when the roles of human and computer are reversed, with respect to the original Turing test. We develop a model using a neural network and features extracted from flights executed by an autonomous drone or controlled by a human operator. Every flight path taken requires the drone to avoid an obstacle that manifests certain attributes. Features from the flight are extracted to distinguish between an autonomous drone and a human operator. Our method achieves 97.8% accuracy, 91% precision and 72% recall, on an imbalanced data used for training and testing the model.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.249 · 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