MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321194910 · doi:10.1109/lra.2023.3245405

Towards More Efficient EfficientDets and Real-Time Marine Debris Detection

2023· article· en· W4321194910 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Federico Zocco, Tzu-Chieh Lin, Ching-I Huang, Hsueh‐Cheng Wang, Mohammad Omar Khyam, Mien Van

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science and Technology CouncilQueen's UniversityNatural Environment Research CouncilQueen's University BelfastSight Research UK
KeywordsUnderwaterComputer scienceObject detectionEnvironmental scienceDebrisDetectorLatency (audio)Real-time computingRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMarine engineeringGeologyPattern recognition (psychology)EngineeringOceanographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marine debris is a problem both for the health of marine environments and for the human health since tiny pieces of plastic called “microplastics” resulting from the debris decomposition over the time are entering the food chain at any levels. For marine debris detection and removal, autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) are a potential solution. In this letter, we focus on the efficiency of AUV vision for real-time marine debris detection. First, we improved the efficiency of a class of state-of-the-art object detectors, namely EfficientDets [1], by 1.5% AP on D0, 2.6% AP on D1, 1.2% AP on D2 and 1.3% AP on D3 without increasing the GPU latency (see Fig.1). Subsequently, we created and made publicly available a dataset for the detection of in-water plastic bags and bottles and trained our improved EfficientDets on this and on two public datasets for marine debris detection. Finally, we began the testing of real-time detection performance on a simulator of marine environments.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations54
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207