MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1480794475 · doi:10.3233/ifs-2006-00303

Fuzzy anisotropic diffusion based on edge detection

2006· article· en· W1480794475 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnisotropic diffusionNoise (video)Gradient noiseEdge detectionValue noiseFuzzy logicNoise reductionDiffusionMultiplicative noiseEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMathematicsDetectorPixelAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionNoise measurementImage processingPhysicsImage (mathematics)Noise floor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fuzzy anisotropic diffusion algorithm based on edge detection and noise estimation is proposed for image denoising and edge enhancement. The edginess and noisiness fuzzy membership values are calculated with the edge detector and noise deviation of center pixel from the neighboring average, respectively. The employed edge detector provides more accurate estimation of edges and is less sensitive to noise than the gradient operator in anisotropic diffusion. Taking noise into account ensures that the diffusion process works well regardless of the type of noise degradation, and effectively reduces the number of iterations. We demonstrate how the rather complicated edge detection and noise estimation can be put together through fuzzy inference and embedded into anisotropic diffusion to provide better control on the diffusion processing. Quantitative and qualitative evaluations demonstrate superior performance of the proposed fuzzy approach while processing images with additive and multiplicative noise.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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