MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398245383 · doi:10.1155/2024/4719669

An IoT‐Based Automatic Vehicle Accident Detection and Visual Situation Reporting System

2024· article· en· W4398245383 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shehzad Aslam, Shahid Islam, Natasha Nigar, Sunday Adeola Ajagbe, Matthew O. Adigun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccident (philosophy)Computer scienceInternet of ThingsComputer securityTransport engineeringReal-time computingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road accidents are a major cause of injuries and deaths worldwide. Many accident victims lose their lives because of the late arrival of the emergency response team (ERT) at the accident site. Moreover, the ERT often lacks crucial visual information about the victims and the condition of the vehicles involved in the accident, leading to a less effective rescue operation. To address these challenges, a new Internet of Things (IoT)‐based system is proposed that uses on‐vehicle sensors to detect and report the accident to rescue operator without any human involvement. The sensor data are automatically transmitted to a remote server to create a visual representation of the accident vehicles (which existing systems lack), facilitating the situation‐based rescue operation. The system tackles any false reporting issue and also sends alerts to the victim’s family. A mobile application has also been developed for eyewitnesses to manually report the accident. The proposed system is evaluated in a simulated environment using a remote‐controlled car. The results show that the system is robust and effective, automatically generating visuals of accident vehicles to facilitate informed rescue operation. The system has the potential to aid the ERT in providing timely first aid and, thus, saving human lives.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.297
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207