MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281639233 · doi:10.21810/jicw.v5i1.4185

Deep learning small arms recognition

2022· article· en· W4281639233 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Intelligence Conflict and Warfare · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Defense Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisarmamentIdentification (biology)Artificial intelligenceDeep learningField (mathematics)Context (archaeology)Perspective (graphical)Computer scienceProcess (computing)Machine learningLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The automated detection, recognition, and identification of small arms through deep learning tools is a recent process that seems to offer interesting possibilities in the field of conventional disarmament. As the field of research has so far mainly focused on detection models in the context of domestic security, it is interesting to explore, in this paper, the development of a basic small arms recognition model and its potential use in the field of conventional disarmament; this paper lays the foundations of a basic small arms recognition model through its development using deep learning tools and its experimental testing. The initial results of the basic model developed in this paper put in perspective the foundations for improvement towards a developed recognition model and towards a complex identification model of small arms. Moreover, this paper also puts in perspective the potential of such models in the field of conventional disarmament.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.193 · 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