MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DIGITAL VIDEO IMAGES IN FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION

2022· article· en· W4389371651 on OpenAlexfundno aff
S. D. Dolginov

Bibliographic record

VenueEx Jure · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSecurity, Politics, and Digital Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Relevance (law)Reliability (semiconductor)Digital videoArtificial intelligenceSoftwareMode (computer interface)Digital forensicsMultimediaComputer visionFrame (networking)Human–computer interactionComputer securityTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: the article discusses the modern possibilities and prospects for the development of technologies for automatic identification of a person by his video images. Some legal and technical aspects of the implementation of this technology are analyzed. Attention is drawn to the factors affecting the completeness and reliability of the display of human features captured on digital video images. An important place is occupied by the study of problems in extracting information from video recording tools, ways to eliminate them. The possibilities of using the information obtained from the means of video recording in the practice of disclosure and investigation of crimes are reflected. The practice of implementing hardware and software complexes in the Russian Federation and the Perm Region is investigated. The article describes the development of algorithms for machine image recognition that allow identification in automatic mode with a high level of accuracy and speed, searching through information arrays of digital photographs. The development of modern technologies makes it possible to use in practice an algorithm that allows recognizing not only a face, but also its emotional state, up to complex, composite emotions. This is of particular relevance in the prevention of terrorist acts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.296
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEx JureSame topicSecurity, Politics, and Digital TransformationFrench-language works237,207