YOLO-Based Models for Smoke and Wildfire Detection in Ground and Aerial Images
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
Wildland fires negatively impact forest biodiversity and human lives. They also spread very rapidly. Early detection of smoke and fires plays a crucial role in improving the efficiency of firefighting operations. Deep learning techniques are used to detect fires and smoke. However, the different shapes, sizes, and colors of smoke and fires make their detection a challenging task. In this paper, recent YOLO-based algorithms are adopted and implemented for detecting and localizing smoke and wildfires within ground and aerial images. Notably, the YOLOv7x model achieved the best performance with an mAP (mean Average Precision) score of 80.40% and fast detection speed, outperforming the baseline models in detecting both smoke and wildfires. YOLOv8s obtained a high mAP of 98.10% in identifying and localizing only wildfire smoke. These models demonstrated their significant potential in handling challenging scenarios, including detecting small fire and smoke areas; varying fire and smoke features such as shape, size, and colors; the complexity of background, which can include diverse terrain, weather conditions, and vegetation; and addressing visual similarities among smoke, fog, and clouds and the the visual resemblances among fire, lighting, and sun glare.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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