MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984378939 · doi:10.1109/crv.2010.19

Organ Recognition Using Gabor Filters

2010· article· en· W1984378939 on OpenAlexaff
Shiva Zaboli, Arash Tabibiazar, Paul Fieguth

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSegmentationBiometricsPattern recognition (psychology)Gabor filterFilter (signal processing)Image segmentationComputationComputer visionFeature extractionAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research is to investigate the possibility of using medical image information to extract unique features and classify different patients' organ tissues, such as the prostate, based on concepts related to what is already done in iris recognition. This paper therefore presents a new approach in medical imaging, an organ recognition system, tested on a standard database of grey scale prostate images in order to validate its performance. In this research, features of the prostate image were encoded by convolving the normalized organ region with a 2D Gabor filter and then quantizing its phase in order to produce a bit-wise biometric template. Our experiments prove that prostate patterns have a low degree of freedom to be used in organ recognition systems and inter-class and intraclass distributions are highly correlated. However, there are still open issues that need to be addressed for future work on organ recognition, including precise segmentation and intensive computation cost.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207