MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1241639403 · doi:10.1117/12.2188252

Sparse reconstruction of compressed sensing multispectral data using a cross-spectral multilayered conditional random field model

2015· article· en· W1241639403 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Li, Mohammad Javad Shafiee, Farnoud Kazemzadeh, Alexander Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompressed sensingMultispectral imageComputer scienceHyperspectral imagingConditional random fieldFull spectral imagingArtificial intelligenceSpectral imagingIterative reconstructionComputer visionSignal reconstructionPattern recognition (psychology)Remote sensingSignal processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The broadband spectrum contains more information than what the human eye can detect. Spectral information from different wavelengths can provide unique information about the intrinsic properties of an object. Recently compressed sensing imaging systems with low acquisition time have been introduced. To utilize compressed sensing strategies, strong reconstruction algorithms that can reconstruct a signal from sparse observations are required. This work proposes a cross-spectral multi-layered conditional random field (CS-MCRF) approach for sparse reconstruction of multi-spectral compressive sensing data in multi-spectral stereoscopic vision imaging systems. The CS-MCRF will use information between neighboring spectral bands to better utilize available information for reconstruction. This method was evaluated using simulated compressed sensing multi-spectral imaging data. Results show improvement over existing techniques in preserving spectral fidelity while effectively inferring missing information from sparsely available observations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207