MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288070419 · doi:10.18280/ts.390323

Artificial Intelligence Based Social Distance Monitoring in Public Areas

2022· article· en· W4288070419 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdülkadir Albayrak

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial distanceComputer scienceScope (computer science)Perspective (graphical)Artificial intelligenceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Computer visionInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2. There are two ways of contamination risk, namely spreading through droplets or aerosol-type spreading into the air with people's speech in crowded environments. The best way to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in a crowd public area is to follow social distance rules. Violation of the social distance is a common situation in areas where people frequently visit such as hospitals, schools and shopping centers. In this study, an artificial intelligence-based social distance determination study was developed in order to detect social distance violations in crowded areas. Within the scope of the study, a new dataset was proposed to determine social distance between pedestrians. The YOLOv3 algorithm, which is very successful in object detection, was compared with the SSD-MobileNET, which is considered to be a light weighted model, and the traditionally handcrafted methods Haar-like cascade and HOG methods. Inability to obtain depth information, which is one of the biggest problems encountered in monocular cameras, has been tried to be eliminated by perspective transformation. In this way, the social distance violation detected in specific area is notified by the system to the relevant people with a warning.

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 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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207