MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ACE: Automated Exam Control and E-Proctoring System Using Deep Face Recognition

2023· article· en· W4386921035 on OpenAlexaff
M Nirmala, B Rajalakshmi, Vibha Krishna Dandu, Santosha LS Tallapalli, Harsh Karanwal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicBrain Tumor Detection and Classification
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacial recognition systemComputer scienceFace (sociological concept)Artificial intelligenceControl (management)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the advent of technology, online exams have become the norm in various government exams such as JEE, NEET, and CET. However., the verification of students during these exams still remains a manual process, leading to potential cases of impersonation and fraud. To address this issue, we propose a system that incorporates automated registration, verification and live proctoring using advanced face recognition and speech technologies. In this paper, we present the integration of existing technologies for an exam management system. The objective of the system is to simplify the registration process, ensure the authenticity of students, and provide live proctoring during exams. Our scope includes designing and implementing the system, evaluating its performance, and suggesting future improvements. The system allows for capturing and storing student details and pictures, cross-verifying pictures during the exam, and live proctoring to monitor the exam environment. Additionally, the system provides an easy-to-use attendance sheet that can be exported to PDF. Our proposed system uses VGG model for face recognition which is a deep learning model that adopts a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) architecture to acquire knowledge about features from facial images. By extracting features from the images, the model can compare and match them with the existing database pictures, thereby ensuring accurate verification.

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 score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBrain Tumor Detection and ClassificationFrench-language works237,207