SWIFT: Simulated Wildfire Images for Fast Training Dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wildland fires cause economic and ecological damage with devastating consequences, including loss of life. To reduce these risks, numerous fire detection and recognition systems using deep learning techniques have been developed. However, the limited availability of annotated datasets has decelerated the development of reliable deep learning techniques for detecting and monitoring fires. For such, a novel dataset, namely, SWIFT, is presented in this paper for detecting and recognizing wildland smoke and fires. SWIFT includes a large number of synthetic images and videos of smoke and wildfire with their corresponding annotations, as well as environmental data, including temperature, humidity, wind direction, and speed. It represents various wildland fire scenarios collected from multiple viewpoints, covering forest interior views, views near active fires, ground views, and aerial views. In addition, three deep learning models, namely, BoucaNet, DC-Fire, and CT-Fire, are adopted to recognize forest fires and address their related challenges. These models are trained using the SWIFT dataset and tested using real fire images. BoucaNet performed well in recognizing wildland fires and overcoming challenging limitations, including the complexity of the background, the variation in smoke and wildfire features, and the detection of small wildland fire areas. This shows the potential of sim-to-real deep learning in wildland fires.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".