MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226049389 · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3170481

Extracting Unambiguous Drone Signature Using High-Speed Camera

2022· article· en· W4226049389 on OpenAlexaff
Frank Billy Djupkep Dizeu, Michel Picard, Marc-Antoine Drouin, Guillaume Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneComputer scienceComputer visionPropellerRotation (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceSignature (topology)Frame (networking)Frame rateKinematicsMathematicsEngineeringMarine engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, the use of drones for recreational and commercial activities has grown rapidly due to their affordability and performance. This growing use raises concerns about the threats drones pose to the security of sensitive areas such as airports, prisons, industrial and military facilities. In response to these threats, drones detection methods are being actively developed. In particular, most camera-based methods rely on appearance to perform detection. They are therefore prone to error due to the great similarity between drones and some other flying entities such as birds. However, from a kinematic perspective, unlike birds, drones, especially multicopters, have a propeller rotation speed. The method proposed in this paper uses the propeller rotation speed as the key physical parameter on which to rely to unambiguously distinguish drones from other flying entities. The basic idea consists in using discrete Fourier transform to determine the propellers rotation speed from high frame rate videos, and extracting the propellers induced drone signature as a quantitative camera-based drone signature. The proposed algorithm proceeds as follows: flying entities are continuously tracked in the sky; discrete Fourier transform, applied to the video stream within a time window ending at the current instant (frame), is used to extract the propellers induced drone signature which unambiguously confirm each flying entity as being a drone or not. Experimental results obtained using a consumer-grade camera at a frame rate of$240Hz$demonstrate the effectiveness and reliability of the proposed method.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207