MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7034557960

Toward Energy-Efficient Deep Neural Networks for Forest Fire Detection in an Image

2024· article· en· W7034557960 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Technology and Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkDeep learningArtificial neural networkEnergy consumptionField (mathematics)Fire detectionIdentification (biology)Energy (signal processing)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest fires cause huge losses and are a serious problem facing many countries worldwide, including the USA, Canada, Brazil, Siberia, and Indonesia, to name a few. Automatic identification of forest fires in an image is thus an important field to research in order to minimize disasters while also helping in mitigation planning and designing rescue tactics. Artificial Intelligence technologies, especially deep neural networks, have emerged recently with promises to detect fires with better accuracy from an image. However, the massive energy consumption of deep neural networks thwarts their widespread adoption, especially when it comes to onsite detection of fire utilizing low-power devices such as those embedded in a drone or an artificial satellite. In this paper, we develop multiple deep neural network models such as a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), a Deep Belief Network (DBN), an Auto Encoder (AEnc), and a U-net model to detect forest fires and systematically analyze their accuracy and energy consumption using IEEE FLAME Dateset which is openly available at IEEE data portal. After developing the models, we systematically pruned the models, retrained them, and analyzed their accuracy and energy consumption upon deployment. Our analysis shows that the CNN has the highest accuracy (almost 99%) on the validation data set, whereas the DBN model consumes the least amount of energy after deploying on both CPU and GPU. The trained models are deployed on a website for use. The source code can be found on GitHub (https://github.com/akdasUAF/ForestFireDetection).

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigitalCommons - Kennesaw State University (Kennesaw State University)Same topicMilitary Technology and StrategiesFrench-language works237,207