MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993530675 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.170

A Fast Approximate Nearest Neighbor Search Algorithm in the Hamming Space

2012· article· en· W1993530675 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocality-sensitive hashingHamming spaceHamming distanceHash functionk-nearest neighbors algorithmNearest neighbor searchComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Fingerprint (computing)Hamming codeBinary numberBest bin firstBinary codeHash tableAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fast approximate nearest neighbor search algorithm for the (binary) Hamming space is proposed. The proposed Error Weighted Hashing (EWH) algorithm is up to 20 times faster than the popular locality sensitive hashing (LSH) algorithm and works well even for large nearest neighbor distances where LSH fails. EWH significantly reduces the number of candidate nearest neighbors by weighing them based on the difference between their hash vectors. EWH can be used for multimedia retrieval and copy detection systems that are based on binary fingerprinting. On a fingerprint database with more than 1,000 videos, for a specific detection accuracy, we demonstrate that EWH is more than 10 times faster than LSH. For the same retrieval time, we show that EWH has a significantly better detection accuracy with a 15 times lower error rate.

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.277 · 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