MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1502623855 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511635465.026

Medial Models for Vision

2009· book-chapter· en· W1502623855 on OpenAlexaff
Kaleem Siddiqi, Stephen M. Pizer

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoundary (topology)RADIUSLocus (genetics)SPHERESRepresentation (politics)GeometryMathematicsPoint (geometry)Object (grammar)Mathematical analysisPhysicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medial Representations of Objects A medial representation of an object describes a locus midway between (at the center of a sphere bitangent to) two sections of the boundary, and gives the distance to the boundary, called the medial radius. The object is obtained as the union of overlapping bitangent spheres. This results in a locus of ( p , r ), where p gives the sphere center and r gives the radius of the sphere. In some representations, the vectors from the medial point to the two or more corresponding boundary points are included; in others they are derived. The Blum medial axis is a transformation of an object boundary that has the same topology as the object; thus, the boundary can generate the medial locus ( p , r ), and the latter can also generate the object boundary. In the first direction the transformation is a function, but in the second direction it is one-to-many, because a medial point describes more than one boundary point. One of the strengths of using the medial representation as a primitive is that any unbranching, connected subset of the medial locus generates intrinsic space coordinates for the part of the object interior corresponding to it. These coordinates include positional location in the medial sheet, a choice of spoke (left or right) and length along that spoke.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207