MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403291952 · doi:10.1007/s10462-024-10978-x

A systematic review of computer vision-based personal protective equipment compliance in industry practice: advancements, challenges and future directions

2024· review· en· W4403291952 on OpenAlexaff
Arso M. Vukićević, Miloš Petrović, Pavle Milošević, Aleksandar Peulić, Kosta Jovanović, Aleksandar Novaković

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Intelligence Review · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersScience Fund of the Republic of Serbia
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)Personal protective equipmentComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)MedicinePsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Pathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Computerized compliance of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is an emerging topic in academic literature that aims to enhance workplace safety through the automation of compliance and prevention of PPE misuse (which currently relies on manual employee supervision and reporting). Although trends in the scientific literature indicate a high potential for solving the compliance problem by employing computer vision (CV) techniques, the practice has revealed a series of barriers that limit their wider applications. This article aims to contribute to the advancement of CV-based PPE compliance by providing a comparative review of high-level approaches, algorithms, datasets, and technologies used in the literature. The systematic review highlights industry-specific challenges, environmental variations, and computational costs related to the real-time management of PPE compliance. The issues of employee identification and identity management are also discussed, along with ethical and cybersecurity concerns. Through the concept of CV-based PPE Compliance 4.0, which encapsulates PPE, human, and company spatio-temporal variabilities, this study provides guidelines for future research directions for addressing the identified barriers. The further advancements and adoption of CV-based solutions for PPE compliance will require simultaneously addressing human identification, pose estimation, object recognition and tracking, necessitating the development of corresponding public datasets.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtificial Intelligence ReviewSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207