MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407920598 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580113

An Intelligent Surveillance Model for Wild Forest Fire Detection Using Deep Learning for Drone application

2025· article· fr· W4407920598 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ali Fadhil Yaseen Althabhawee, Bashra Kadhim Oleiwi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicFire Detection and Safety Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneDeep learningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRemote sensingGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wild forest fires are among the most hazardous catastrophes, causing substantial losses in numerous regions; in order to create a well-efficient forest fire detection system, modern methods must be used to create the system, and one of the modern methods at the present time is deep learning.The objective of this study is to develop an intelligent surveillance model for detection and classification of uncontrolled forest fires utilizing a convolutional neural network (CNN) and a forest fire dataset for drone applications.The goal is to develop an intelligent model that can detect wild forest fires and classify their severity.In this proposed system, the CNN consists of 13 layers, starting from the input layer, which is a single layer with dimensions proportional to the size of the image used, and ending with the output layer, which consists of three layers: the FC layer, the SoftMax classifier, and the classification outputs.It determines how many rows this convolutional neural network can use, and there are two categories (fire, no fire).In addition, there are 9 middle layers, where these layers are mainly repeated from the convolutional layer, Max Pooling, and ReLU.Where each layer has its own measurements, number of filters, and method of movement.Extensive simulations were conducted and the findings were recorded from several aspects.Through the results, there is a technical improvement in the proposed system in various measures.On the data set utilized, the proposed system yielded favorable outcomes, with an average prediction accuracy of 98%.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicFire Detection and Safety SystemsFrench-language works237,207