MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401455951 · doi:10.1155/2024/7113084

Method on Efficient Operation of Multiple Models for Vision‐Based In‐Flight Risky Behavior Recognition in UAM Safety and Security

2024· article· en· W4401455951 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
김병훈, Byeongjoon Noh, Kyowon Song

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFire Detection and Safety Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of EducationSoonchunhyang UniversityNational Research Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer securityArtificial intelligenceComputer visionEngineeringSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid development of urban air mobility (UAM) has emphasized the need for in‐flight control and passenger safety management. Recently, with the significant spread of technology in the field of computer vision, research has been conducted to manage passenger safety and security with vision‐based approaches. Previous research predominantly focuses on single‐task vision models, which limits their ability to comprehensively recognize various situations. In addition, conventional vision‐based deep learning models require substantial computational power, potentially reducing the operational sustainability of UAMs with limited electrical resources. In this study, we propose a novel cabin surveillance framework for passenger safety and security. The proposed method achieves high accuracy by using a single model optimized for a specific task and ensures maximum computational efficiency through a scheduler that executes the appropriate models based on the situation. It can effectively perform roles such as detecting prohibited items and recognition of dangerous/abnormal behavior. Moreover, it simplifies the management of the involved models by adding new models or updating the existing ones, and it provides a sustainable system by reducing energy consumption. Through comprehensive experiments on various benchmarks, we validated the effectiveness of each model and verified the practicality of the proposed framework in terms of time complexity and resource usage through practical tests.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicFire Detection and Safety SystemsFrench-language works237,207