MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990838225 · doi:10.1117/12.421169

<title>Moving image compression and generalization capability of constructive neural networks</title>

2001· article· en· W1990838225 on OpenAlexaff
Liying Ma, K. Khorasani

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGeneralizationConstructiveArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkSimilarity (geometry)Computer visionData compressionImage compressionPattern recognition (psychology)Feed forwardImage (mathematics)BackpropagationImage processingMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To date numerous techniques have been proposed to compress digital images to ease their storage and transmission over communication channels. Recently, a number of image compression algorithms using Neural Networks NNs have been developed. Particularly, several constructive feed-forward neural networks FNNs have been proposed by researchers for image compression, and promising results have been reported. At the previous SPIE AeroSense conference 2000, we proposed to use a constructive One-Hidden-Layer Feedforward Neural Network OHL-FNN for compressing digital images. In this paper, we first investigate the generalization capability of the proposed OHL-FNN in the presence of additive noise for network training and/ or generalization. Extensive experimental results for different scenarios are presented. It is revealed that the constructive OHL-FNN is not as robust to additive noise in input image as expected. Next, the constructive OHL-FNN is applied to moving images, video sequences. The first, or other specified frame in a moving image sequence is used to train the network. The remaining moving images that follow are then generalized/compressed by this trained network. Three types of correlation-like criteria measuring the similarity of any two images are introduced. The relationship between the generalization capability of the constructed net and the similarity of images is investigated in some detail. It is shown that the constructive OHL-FNN is promising even for changing images such as those extracted from a football game.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207