MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321021760 · doi:10.1109/tii.2023.3245645

Electric Power Fuse Identification With Deep Learning

2023· article· en· W4321021760 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Giard-Leroux, Guillaume Cléroux, Shreyas Sunil Kulkarni, François Bouffard, Martin Vallières

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWelding Techniques and Residual Stresses
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuse (electrical)Computer scienceNotationIdentification (biology)Process (computing)Artificial intelligenceCode (set theory)Set (abstract data type)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)EngineeringProgramming languageElectrical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of arc flash studies, survey pictures of electrical installations need to be manually analyzed. A challenging task is to identify fuse types, which can be determined from physical characteristics, such as shape, color, and size. To automate this process using deep learning techniques, a new dataset of fuse pictures from past arc flash projects and data from the web was created. Multiple experiments were performed to train a final model, reaching an average precision of 91.06% on the holdout set, which confirms its potential for identification of fuse types in new photos. By identifying fuse types using physical characteristics only, the need to take clear pictures of the label text is eliminated, allowing pictures to be taken away from danger, thereby improving the safety of workers. All the resources needed to repeat the experiments are openly accessible, including the code and datasets.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Industrial InformaticsSame topicWelding Techniques and Residual StressesFrench-language works237,207