MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211040998 · doi:10.1145/3412353

Driver Identification Using Optimized Deep Learning Model in Smart Transportation

2022· article· en· W4211040998 on OpenAlex

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

VenueACM Transactions on Internet Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHyperparameterIdentification (biology)Deep learningNoveltyArtificial intelligenceMachine learningFacial recognition systemFace (sociological concept)Novelty detectionFeature extraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) is said to revolutionize the travel experience by making it safe, secure, and comfortable for the people. Although vehicles have been automated up to a certain extent, it still has critical security issues that require thorough study and advanced solutions. The security vulnerabilities of ITS allows the attacker to steal the vehicle. Therefore, the identification of drivers is required in order to develop a safe and secure system so that the vehicles can be protected from theft. There are two ways in which a driver can be identified: 1) face recognition of the driver, and 2) based on driving behavior. Face recognition includes image processing of 2-D images and learning of the features, which require high computational power. Drivers are known to have unique driving styles, whose data can be captured by the sensors. Therefore, the second method identifies drivers based on the analysis of the sensor data and it requires comparatively lesser computational power. In this paper, an optimized deep learning model is trained on the sensor data to correctly identify the drivers. The Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) deep learning model is optimized for better performance. The novelty of the approach in this work is the inclusion of hyperparameter tuning using a nature-inspired optimization algorithm, which is an important and essential step in discovering the optimal hyperparameters for training the model which in turn increases the accuracy. The CAN-BUS dataset is used for experimentation and evaluation of the training model. Evaluation parameters such as accuracy, precision score, F1 score, and ROC AUC curve are considered to evaluate the performance of 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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