Fast registration algorithm using a variational principle for mutual information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A method is proposed for cross-modal image registration based on mutual information (MI) matching criteria. Both conventional and "normalized" MI are considered. MI may be expressed as a functional of a general image displacement field u. The variational principle for MI provides a field equation for u. The method employs a set of "registration points" consisting of a prescribed number of strongest edge points of the reference image, and minimizes an objective function D defined as the sum of the square residuals of the field equation for u at these points, where u is expressed as a sum over a set of basis functions (the affine model is presented here). D has a global minimum when the images are aligned, with a “basin of attraction” typically of width ~0.3 pixels. By pre-filtering with a low-pass filter, and using a multiresolution image pyramid, the basin may be significantly widened. The Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm is used to minimize D. Tests using randomly distributed misalignments of image pairs show that registration accuracy of 0.02 - 0.07 pixels is achieved, when using cubic B-splines for image representation, interpolation, and Parzen window estimation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".