MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283462816 · doi:10.7146/aul.455.c229

Fake it till you make it: Training Deep Neural Networks for Worker Detection using Synthetic Data

2022· article· en· W4283462816 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Tohidifar, Seyedeh Fatemeh Saffari, Daeho Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkVariety (cybernetics)Artificial intelligenceAutomationDeep neural networksProductivityClothingGraphicsTraining (meteorology)Quality (philosophy)Computer graphicsTraining setMachine learningMultimediaData scienceHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction industry’s productivity and safety have long been a source of concern, while the broad use of deep neural network (DNN)-based visual AI has transformed other industries. Automation and digitalization powered by DNN provide intriguing answers; yetthe lack of high-quality, diversifieddataprevents the construction sector from leveragingthe benefits. This paper presentsa novel computational framework that enables synthetic data generationfor DNN training to overcome the time-consuming manual data collectionand avoiddata privacy problems. The suggested framework uses graphics engines to create a virtual duplicate of the constructionsite that generates non-real yet realistic visuals. The proposedframework randomizes crucial scene elements such as worker pose, clothes, camera viewpoint, and lighting conditionsto enhancethe variety of the synthetic dataset.The findings of this study presentpromisingpotential of synthetic datain DNN training.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207