Phantom Fires: Safe False-Alert Suppression via Multimodal Fusion of a Visible-Patch CNN and Solar Reflection Geometry for Thermal Fault Monitoring
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Abstract
Continuous outdoor thermal monitoring raises an analyst alert whenever an IR pixel exceeds a fixed apparent-temperature threshold. We report a 40-day deployment over 10 cameras (4,143.6 camera-hours) that produced 157 above-threshold events (≥ 150 °C): 122 (77.7 %) solar-glare false positives and 35 (22.3 %) confirmed true thermal events — a glare event rate of 0.0294 events per camera-hour (95 % CI [0.0157, 0.0449], bootstrap n = 1000). To suppress this false-alarm burden without compromising thermal-event recall, we construct a paired visible-patch dataset of 10,622 RGB patches and evaluate a ladder of five glare/noglare discriminators of increasing complexity, from a brightness threshold through a forward Sandia SGHAT geometric model, a logistic regression over 28 hand-crafted features, a small CNN (245,889 parameters), and a multimodal late fusion of the CNN and geometric scores. The fusion classifier reaches 98.6 % accuracy on a balanced 2,126-patch held-out eval set, a 3.3-percentage-point gain over the CNN alone and a 14.1-point gain over the geometric model; the learned weights (w_cnn = 7.34, w_geo = 4.50, bias = −1.93) confirm both streams carry independent signal, and adding the geometric stream cuts the CNN's false-positive count by 73 % while preserving recall. A separate system-level test on the 35 in-window true thermal events shows that both the CNN and the fusion classifier reach 99.58 % specificity (235 of 236 IR/VIS frame pairs preserved at the 150 °C production threshold). The current production deployment runs no glare suppression in place — every above-threshold IR event raises an analyst alert today — so the five-rung ladder and the multimodal fusion are research-grade results, not deployed artefacts. We propose a three-way routing policy (alert, fallback, suppress) that wraps the best rung and report the measured anchors that constrain its expected outcome on the deployment ledger.
How to Cite
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
CNN classification, infrared monitoring, thermal event detection, multimodal late fusion, solar glare false alarms
M. I., & Jurado, J. M. (2024). Automated detection
and tracking of photovoltaic modules from 3D
remote sensing data. Applied Energy, 367, 123242.
doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2024.123242
Hess, D., & Bucher, C. (2024). Characterisation of
the glare properties of photovoltaic modules and
PV systems using a photographic camera. PVSymposium
Proceedings, 1. doi: 10.52825/pv
-symposium.v1i.1174
Hijjawi, U., Lakshminarayana, S., Xu, T., Malfense
Fierro, G. P., & Rahman, M. (2023). A review
of automated solar photovoltaic defect detection
systems. Solar Energy, 262, 112186. doi:
10.1016/j.solener.2023.112186
Ho, C. K., et al. (2018). Sandia solar glare hazard analysis
tool — user’s manual v2g [Computer software
manual]. (https://www.sandia.gov/glare-tools/)
Ho, C. K., Sims, C. A., Yellowhair, J. E., & Wendelin,
T. (2018). Tools to address glare and avian flux
hazards from solar energy systems (Tech. Rep. No.
SAND2018-4440). Sandia National Laboratories.
doi: 10.2172/1476164
International Electrotechnical Commission. (2017). IEC
TS 62446-3:2017. photovoltaic (PV) systems — requirements
for testing, documentation and maintenance
— part 3: Outdoor infrared thermography
of photovoltaic modules and plants (Tech.
Rep.). International Electrotechnical Commission.
Retrieved from https://webstore.iec.ch/en/
publication/28628
Jahn, U., et al. (2018). Review on IR and EL imaging for
PV field applications (Tech. Rep. No. IEA-PVPS
T13-10:2018). IEA PVPS Task 13. Retrieved
from https://iea-pvps.org/key-topics/review-on-ir
-and-el-imaging-for-pv-field-applications/
Mellit, A., & Kalogirou, S. (2021). Artificial intelligence
and internet of things to improve efficacy
of diagnosis and remote sensing of solar photovoltaic
systems: Challenges, recommendations and future directions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 143, 110889. doi: 10.1016/j.rser
.2021.110889

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
The Prognostic and Health Management Society advocates open-access to scientific data and uses a Creative Commons license for publishing and distributing any papers. A Creative Commons license does not relinquish the author’s copyright; rather it allows them to share some of their rights with any member of the public under certain conditions whilst enjoying full legal protection. By submitting an article to the International Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society, the authors agree to be bound by the associated terms and conditions including the following:
As the author, you retain the copyright to your Work. By submitting your Work, you are granting anybody the right to copy, distribute and transmit your Work and to adapt your Work with proper attribution under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States license. You assign rights to the Prognostics and Health Management Society to publish and disseminate your Work through electronic and print media if it is accepted for publication. A license note citing the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License as shown below needs to be placed in the footnote on the first page of the article.
First Author et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 United States License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.