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 OpenAlexaff
Mani Malek Esmaeili, Rabab Ward, Mehrdad Fatourechi

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.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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

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

Citations53
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207