MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389144641 · doi:10.32604/cmc.2023.043168

Shadow Extraction and Elimination of Moving Vehicles for Tracking Vehicles

2023· article· en· W4389144641 on OpenAlexaff
Kalpesh Jadav, Vishal Sorathiya, Walid El‐Shafai, Torki Altameem, Moustafa H. Aly, Vipul Vekariya, Kawsar Ahmed, Francis M. Bui

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsShadow (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceTracking (education)Constant false alarm rateProcess (computing)Vehicle tracking systemGaussianTransformation (genetics)Intelligent transportation systemEngineeringKalman filter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shadow extraction and elimination is essential for intelligent transportation systems (ITS) in vehicle tracking application. The shadow is the source of error for vehicle detection, which causes misclassification of vehicles and a high false alarm rate in the research of vehicle counting, vehicle detection, vehicle tracking, and classification. Most of the existing research is on shadow extraction of moving vehicles in high intensity and on standard datasets, but the process of extracting shadows from moving vehicles in low light of real scenes is difficult. The real scenes of vehicles dataset are generated by self on the Vadodara–Mumbai highway during periods of poor illumination for shadow extraction of moving vehicles to address the above problem. This paper offers a robust shadow extraction of moving vehicles and its elimination for vehicle tracking. The method is distributed into two phases: In the first phase, we extract foreground regions using a mixture of Gaussian model, and then in the second phase, with the help of the Gamma correction, intensity ratio, negative transformation, and a combination of Gaussian filters, we locate and remove the shadow region from the foreground areas. Compared to the outcomes proposed method with outcomes of an existing method, the suggested method achieves an average true negative rate of above 90%, a shadow detection rate SDR (η%), and a shadow discrimination rate SDR (ξ%) of 80%. Hence, the suggested method is more appropriate for moving shadow detection in real scenes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputers, materials & continua/Computers, materials & continua (Print)Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207