MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A manifold intelligent decision system for fusion and benchmarking of deep waste-sorting models

2024· article· en· W4391383156 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersOstravská Univerzita v OstravěMinisterstvo Školství, Mládeže a TělovýchovyEuropean Commission
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmarkingSortingArtificial intelligenceManifold (fluid mechanics)Decision support systemFusionDeep learningMachine learningOperations researchAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increases in population and prosperity are linked to a worldwide rise in garbage. The “classification” and “recycling” of solid waste is a crucial tactic for dealing with the waste problem. This paper presents a new two-layer intelligent decision system for waste sorting based on fused features of Deep Learning (DL) models as well as a selection of an optimal deep Waste-Sorting Model (WSM) based on Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM). A dataset comprising 1451 samples of images of waste, distributed across four classes – cardboard (403), glass (501), metal (410), and general trash (137), was used for sorting. This study proposes a Multi-Fused Decision Matrix (MFDM) based on identified fusion score level rules, evaluation criteria, and deep fused waste-sorting models. Five fusion rules used in the sorting process and the evaluation perspectives into the MFDM are sum, weighted sum, product, maximum, and minimum rules. Additionally, each of entropy and Visekriterijumska Optimizacija i Kompromisno Resenje in Serbian (VIKOR) methods was used for weighting selected criteria as well as ranking deep WSMs. The highest accuracy rate of 98% was scored by ResNet50-GoogleNet- Inception based on the minimum rule. However, under the same rule, an insufficient accuracy rate of sorting was presented by ResNet50-GoogleNet-Xception. Since Qi = 0 for Inception-Xception, the final output based on MCDM methods indicates that the fused Inception-Xception model outperforms the other fused deep WSMs, which achieved the lowest values of Qi. Thus, Inception-Xception was chosen as the best deep waste-sorting model based on images of waste, multiple evaluation criteria, and different fusion perspectives. The mean and standard deviation metrics were both used to validate the selection findings objectively. The suggested approach can aid urban decision-makers in prioritizing and choosing an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-optimized optimal sorting model.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.233 · 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