MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405939643 · doi:10.38032/jea.2024.04.004

An IoT enabled Artifact Protection System for Museum using Computer Vision

2024· article· en· W4405939643 on OpenAlexaff
Abu Salman Shaikat, Molla Rashied Hussein, Rumana Tasnim, Md Zonayed, Sayma Suntana Jhara, Md. Mizanur Rahman, Anwar Hossain Mokhter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Engineering Advancements · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicConservation Techniques and Studies
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtifact (error)Computer scienceRaspberry piCultural artifactComputer securityComputer visionSecurity systemReliability (semiconductor)Artificial intelligenceImage processingHaar-like featuresInternet of ThingsImage (mathematics)Feature extractionFace detection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, museums lack preventive security measures, leading to the theft of precious artifacts. Safeguarding artifacts and any sacred items in museums is a challenging job, as they need to be secured while at the same time being accessible to all visitors. This calls for an integrated security system to prevent theft and decrease crimes involving artifacts. This paper proposes a novel IoT-enabled, computer vision-based, holistic approach for protecting artifacts in museums. A camera functions as the imaging device that is employed to detect the movement of any artifact from a predetermined position, while the Raspberry Pi 4B manages the processing and operations of the system. This system further utilizes an image processing technique, i.e., the Haar Cascade algorithm and OpenCV, to detect artifact movement. In addition, the device will also record the photos of any authorized or unauthorized individuals anytime it detects any movement of the artifact. The system has produced a high accuracy of 93.33% and high precision of 96.29%, indicating a higher level of reliability with very few false alarms. This method will serve as an efficient mechanism for protecting artifacts at a reduced cost. The proposed system can be implemented at any kind of museum or cultural site.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.808
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Engineering AdvancementsSame topicConservation Techniques and StudiesFrench-language works237,207