MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989159905 · doi:10.1117/12.650866

<title>Cosine transform generalized to lie groups SU(2)xSU(2), O(5), and SU(2)xSU(2)xSU(2): application to digital image processing</title>

2006· article· en· W1989159905 on OpenAlexaff
Mickaël Germain, J. Patera, Yannick Allard

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Filter Design and Implementation
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscrete cosine transformAlgorithmComputer scienceInterpolation (computer graphics)AtmosphericsArtificial intelligencePhysicsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose to apply three of the multiple variants of the 2 and 3-dimensional of the cosine transform. We consider the Lie groups leading to square lattices, namely SU(2)xSU(2) and O(5) in the 2-dimensional space, and the cubic lattice SU(2)xSU(2)xSU(2) in the 3-dimensional space. We aim at evaluating the benefits of some Discrete Group Transform (DGT) techniques, in particular the Continuous Extension of the Discrete Cosine Transform (CEDCT), and at developing new techniques that refine image quality: this refinement is called the high-resolution process. This highest quality is useful to increase the effectiveness of standard features extraction, fusion and classification algorithms. All algorithms based on the 2 and 3-dimensional DGT have the advantage to give the exact value of the original data at the points of the grid lattice, and interpolate well the data values between the grid points. The quality of the interpolation is comparable with the most efficient data interpolation, which are currently used for purposes of image zooming. In our first application, we use DGT techniques to refine fully polarimetric radar images, and to increase the effectiveness of standard features extraction algorithms. In our second application, we apply DGT techniques on medical images extracted from a system and a Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) system.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.007

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicDigital Filter Design and ImplementationFrench-language works237,207