Thermal-based gender recognition using drones: advancing biometric recognition in challenging outdoor environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While biometric recognition typically uses features such as face, fingerprint, and iris to identify individuals, this study focuses on utilising specific characteristics to identify gender. The aim of this article is to propose a procedure for gender recognition under specific conditions. The specific condition addressed is outdoor area monitoring, which presents challenges such as varying lighting conditions and limited camera placement options. To tackle this, a proposed procedure utilises thermal images captured by the drone equipped with a thermal camera. The advantage of thermal images is their independence from ambient light conditions. The captured images are resized and processed using convolutional neural networks (CNNs) (AlexNet, VGG-16, VGG-19) for feature extraction and binary classification. A freely available database of thermal face images is used for training the CNNs, while a own created dataset of thermal images obtained by the drone is used for testing. The findings indicate that the optimised CNNs achieve classification accuracies of 82.4% (VGG-16), 82.9% (AlexNet), and 85.5% (VGG-19). The original contribution of this study lies in demonstrating the suitability of face thermal images obtained through drones for gender recognition purposes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".