MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386173941 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2023.3308564

An Internet of Things and AI-Powered Framework for Long-Term Flood Risk Evaluation

2023· article· en· W4386173941 on OpenAlexaff
Imran Ahmed, Misbah Ahmad, Gwanggil Jeon, Abdellah Chehri

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Science, ICT and Future Planning
KeywordsComputer scienceDeep learningSegmentationArtificial intelligenceFlood mythGround truthConvolutional neural networkArtificial neural networkSatellite imageryImage segmentationPixelRemote sensingMachine learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrating Internet of Things (IoT) and artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have found widespread application in various fields, including smart cities, agriculture, and environmental monitoring. With the increasing availability of satellite imagery and other remote sensing data, deep learning algorithms can be used and trained to detect, classify, and segment flood regions in real time. In addition, deep learning techniques, such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have been successful in this field, enabling the automated analysis of vast amounts of satellite imagery. By combining AI-based flood detection with other data sources, such as meteorological forecasts and ground-based sensors, comprehensive flood monitoring systems that provide early warning of flood events and facilitate effective emergency response can be developed. In this article, we developed an image-based flood segmentation system called DeepLab that uses a deep learning algorithm to detect and segment the presence and extent of floods with high accuracy and speed. The neural network was trained on an extensive collection of satellite images, which were complemented by ground truth labels that indicated the presence of flooded areas. The trained DeepLabv3 model is applied to new satellite images during inference to forecast the likelihood of each pixel belonging to a flooded area. To do this, a binary flood map was generated from the pixel-level forecasts by incorporating a threshold into the output probabilities. The proposed system’s accuracy was high compared to the state-of-the-art methods, as evidenced by segmentation and experimental results. The segmentation accuracy achieved an overall score of 87%.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.432
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207