MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382646338 · doi:10.3390/info14050278

Deep Learning Pet Identification Using Face and Body

2023· article· en· W4382646338 on OpenAlexafffund
Loutfouz Zaman

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIdentification and Quantification in Food
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceBiometricsIdentification (biology)Convolutional neural networkComputer scienceFace (sociological concept)Pattern recognition (psychology)PreprocessorDeep learningTransfer of learningData pre-processingMatching (statistics)LandmarkFacial recognition systemMachine learningMedicineBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the American Humane Association, millions of cats and dogs are lost yearly. Only a few thousand of them are found and returned home. In this work, we use deep learning to help expedite the procedure of finding lost cats and dogs, for which a new dataset is collected. We applied transfer learning methods on different convolutional neural networks for species classification and animal identification. The framework consists of seven sequential layers: data preprocessing, species classification, face and body detection with landmark detection techniques, face alignment, identification, animal soft biometrics, and recommendation. We achieved an accuracy of 98.18% on species classification. In the face identification layer, 80% accuracy was achieved. Body identification resulted in 81% accuracy. When using body identification in addition to face identification, the accuracy increased to 86.5%, with a 100% chance that the animal would be in our top 10 recommendations of matching. By incorporating animals’ soft biometric information, the system can identify animals with 92% confidence.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformationSame topicIdentification and Quantification in FoodFrench-language works237,207