Source author record

James Large

James Large appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Detecting Electric Devices in 3D Images of Bags

The aviation and transport security industries face the challenge of screening high volumes of baggage for threats and contraband in the minimum time possible. Automation and semi-automation of this procedure offers the potential to increase security by detecting more threats and improve the customer experience by speeding up the process. Traditional 2D x-ray images are often extremely difficult to examine due to the fact that they are tightly packed and contain a wide variety of cluttered and occluded objects. Because of these limitations, major airports are introducing 3D x-ray Computed Tomography (CT) baggage scanning. We investigate whether we can automate the process of detecting electric devices in these 3D images of luggage. Detecting electrical devices is of particular concern as they can be used to conceal explosives. Given the massive volume of luggage that needs to be screened for this threat, the best way to automate the detection is to first filter whether a bag contains an electric device or not, and if it does, to identify the number of devices and their location. We present an algorithm, Unpack, Predict, eXtract, Repack (UXPR), which involves unpacking through segmenting the data at a range of scales using an algorithm known as the Sieve, predicting whether a segment is electrical or not based on the histogram of voxel intensities, then repacking the bag by ensembling the segments and predictions to identify the devices in bags. Through a range of experiments using data provided by ALERT (Awareness and Localization of Explosives-Related Threats) we show that this system can find a high proportion of devices with unsupervised segmentation if a similar device has been seen before, and shows promising results for detecting devices not seen at all based on the properties of its constituent parts.

preprint2017arXiv

The Heterogeneous Ensembles of Standard Classification Algorithms (HESCA): the Whole is Greater than the Sum of its Parts

Building classification models is an intrinsically practical exercise that requires many design decisions prior to deployment. We aim to provide some guidance in this decision making process. Specifically, given a classification problem with real valued attributes, we consider which classifier or family of classifiers should one use. Strong contenders are tree based homogeneous ensembles, support vector machines or deep neural networks. All three families of model could claim to be state-of-the-art, and yet it is not clear when one is preferable to the others. Our extensive experiments with over 200 data sets from two distinct archives demonstrate that, rather than choose a single family and expend computing resources on optimising that model, it is significantly better to build simpler versions of classifiers from each family and ensemble. We show that the Heterogeneous Ensembles of Standard Classification Algorithms (HESCA), which ensembles based on error estimates formed on the train data, is significantly better (in terms of error, balanced error, negative log likelihood and area under the ROC curve) than its individual components, picking the component that is best on train data, and a support vector machine tuned over 1089 different parameter configurations. We demonstrate HESCA+, which contains a deep neural network, a support vector machine and two decision tree forests, is significantly better than its components, picking the best component, and HESCA. We analyse the results further and find that HESCA and HESCA+ are of particular value when the train set size is relatively small and the problem has multiple classes. HESCA is a fast approach that is, on average, as good as state-of-the-art classifiers, whereas HESCA+ is significantly better than average and represents a strong benchmark for future research.

preprint2016arXiv

The Great Time Series Classification Bake Off: An Experimental Evaluation of Recently Proposed Algorithms. Extended Version

In the last five years there have been a large number of new time series classification algorithms proposed in the literature. These algorithms have been evaluated on subsets of the 47 data sets in the University of California, Riverside time series classification archive. The archive has recently been expanded to 85 data sets, over half of which have been donated by researchers at the University of East Anglia. Aspects of previous evaluations have made comparisons between algorithms difficult. For example, several different programming languages have been used, experiments involved a single train/test split and some used normalised data whilst others did not. The relaunch of the archive provides a timely opportunity to thoroughly evaluate algorithms on a larger number of datasets. We have implemented 18 recently proposed algorithms in a common Java framework and compared them against two standard benchmark classifiers (and each other) by performing 100 resampling experiments on each of the 85 datasets. We use these results to test several hypotheses relating to whether the algorithms are significantly more accurate than the benchmarks and each other. Our results indicate that only 9 of these algorithms are significantly more accurate than both benchmarks and that one classifier, the Collective of Transformation Ensembles, is significantly more accurate than all of the others. All of our experiments and results are reproducible: we release all of our code, results and experimental details and we hope these experiments form the basis for more rigorous testing of new algorithms in the future.