MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404959384 · doi:10.3390/electronics13234776

Vision-Based Prediction of Flashover Using Transformers and Convolutional Long Short-Term Memory Model

2024· article· en· W4404959384 on OpenAlexaff
M. Hamed Mozaffari, Yuchuan Li, Niloofar Hooshyaripour, Yoon Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformerArc flashComputer scienceTerm (time)Long short term memoryArtificial intelligenceEngineeringVoltageElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prediction of fire growth is crucial for effective firefighting and rescue operations. Recent advancements in vision-based techniques using RGB vision and infrared (IR) thermal imaging data, coupled with artificial intelligence and deep learning techniques, have shown promising solutions to be applied in the detection of fire and the prediction of its behavior. This study introduces the use of Convolutional Long Short-term Memory (ConvLSTM) network models for predicting room fire growth by analyzing spatiotemporal IR thermal imaging data acquired from full-scale room fire tests. Our findings revealed that SwinLSTM, an enhanced version of ConvLSTM combined with transformers (a deep learning architecture based on a new mechanism called multi-head attention) for computer vision purposes, can be used for the prediction of room fire flashover occurrence. Notably, transformer-based ConvLSTM deep learning models, such as SwinLSTM, demonstrate superior prediction capability, which suggests a new vision-based smart solution for future fire growth prediction tasks. The main focus of this work is to perform a feasibility study on the use of a pure vision-based deep learning model for analysis of future video data to anticipate behavior of fire growth in room fire incidents.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207