Detection of Floating Objects on Water Surface Using YOLOv5s in an Edge Computing Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aiming to solve the problems with easy false detection of small targets in river floating object detection and deploying an overly large model, a new method is proposed based on improved YOLOv5s. A new data augmentation method for small objects is designed to enrich the dataset and improve the model’s robustness. Distinct feature extraction network levels incorporate different coordinate attention mechanism pooling methods to enhance the effective feature information extraction of small targets and improve small target detection accuracy. Then, a shallow feature map with 4-fold down-sampling is added, and feature fusion is performed using the Feature Pyramid Network. At the same time, bilinear interpolation replaces the up-sampling method to retain feature information and enhance the network’s ability to sense small targets. Network complex algorithms are optimized to better adapt to embedded platforms. Finally, the model is channel pruned to solve the problem of difficult deployment. The experimental results show that this method has a better feature extraction capability as well as a higher detection accuracy. Compared with the original YOLOv5 algorithm, the accuracy is improved by 15.7%, the error detection rate is reduced by 83% in small target task detection, the detection accuracy can reach 92.01% in edge testing, and the inference speed can reach 33 frames per second, which can meet the real-time requirements.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".