MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986477076 · doi:10.1186/2193-9772-2-2

High resolution micrograph synthesis using a parametric texture model and a particle filter

2013· article· en· W1986477076 on OpenAlexaff
Ramakrishna Tipireddy, Roger Ghanem, Somnath Ghosh, Daniel Paquet

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrating materials and manufacturing innovation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
FundersDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing InnovationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMicrographPixelArtificial intelligenceImage resolutionResolution (logic)Parametric statisticsComputer scienceMathematicsOpticsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a methodology for synthesizing high resolution micrographs from low resolution ones using a parametric texture model and a particle filter. Information contained in high resolution micrographs is relevant to the accurate prediction of microstructural behavior and the nucleation of instabilities. As these micrographs may be tedious and uneconomical to obtain over an extended spatial domain, we propose a statistical approach for interpolating fine details over a whole computational domain starting with a low resolution prior and high resolution micrographs available only at a few spatial locations. As a first step, a small set of high resolution micrographs are decomposed into a set of multi-scale and multi-orientation subbands using a complex wavelet transform. Parameters of a texture model are computed as the joint statistics of the decomposed subbands. The synthesis algorithm then generates random micrographs satisfying the parameters of the texture model by recursively updating the gray level values of the pixels in the input micrograph. A density-based Monte Carlo filter is used at each step of the recursion to update the generated micrograph, using a low resolution micrograph at that location as a measurement. The process is continued until the synthesized micrograph has the same statistics as those from the high resolution micrographs. The proposed method combines a texture synthesis procedure with a particle filter and produces good quality high resolution micrographs.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueIntegrating materials and manufacturing innovationSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207