MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963888222 · doi:10.1117/1.3431711

Computation-aware algorithm selection approach for interlaced-to-progressive conversion

2010· article· en· W1963888222 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

VenueOptical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAlgorithmComputationInterpolation (computer graphics)CovarianceCADMean squared errorSelection (genetic algorithm)Artificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss deinterlacing results in a computationally constrained and varied environment. The proposed computation-aware algorithm selection approach (CASA) for fast interlaced to progressive conversion algorithm consists of three methods: the line-averaging (LA) method for plain regions, the modified edge-based line-averaging (MELA) method for medium regions, and the proposed covariance-based adaptive deinterlacing (CAD) method for complex regions. The proposed CASA uses two criteria, mean-squared error (MSE) and CPU time, for assigning the method. We proposed a CAD method. The principle idea of CAD is based on the correspondence between the high and low-resolution covariances. We estimated the local covariance coefficients from an interlaced image using Wiener filtering theory and then used these optimal minimum MSE interpolation coefficients to obtain a deinterlaced image. The CAD method, though more robust than most known methods, was not found to be very fast compared to the others. To alleviate this issue, we proposed an adaptive selection approach using a fast deinterlacing algorithm rather than using only one CAD algorithm. The proposed hybrid approach of switching between the conventional schemes (LA and MELA) and our CAD was proposed to reduce the overall computational load. A reliable condition to be used for switching the schemes was presented after a wide set of initial training processes. The results of computer simulations showed that the proposed methods outperformed a number of methods presented in the literature.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.250 · 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