Utilising Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Classifying Fire Disasters Through Surveillance: An Indoor and Outdoor Perspective to Predict Man-Made or Natural Disaster
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disasters, unpredictable events inflicting substantial harm to human lives and property, are categorized broadly into natural and man-made occurrences.Fires, in particular, pose significant threats due to their hazardous impact and the challenges associated with early detection and origin determination.This study narrows its focus to fires, aiming to predict their onset and distinguish between man-made and natural causes.Over recent decades, traditional algorithms have been employed to predict fire events; however, this work adopts a novel approach, utilizing deep neural networks in conjunction with surveillance systems.The proposed model not only predicts the onset of a fire but also identifies its likely cause and location, specifically differentiating between indoor and outdoor fires.Furthermore, the model maintains the integrity of sensitive details present in the original images, an essential consideration for privacy and safety.The model was trained and tested on realtime fire datasets, resulting in an impressive accuracy of 97.44% in predicting the nature of the fire and classifying its location.This work thus contributes significantly to disaster management efforts by enabling early fire detection, facilitating rapid response, and ultimately safeguarding human lives and property.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it