MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998157976 · doi:10.1109/tip.2014.2322451

Phase-Based Binarization of Ancient Document Images: Model and Applications

2014· article· en· W1998157976 on OpenAlexafffund
Hossein Ziaei Nafchi, Reza Farrahi Moghaddam, Mohamed Cheriet

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePreprocessorRobustness (evolution)Ground truthComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Historical documentPhase congruencyComputer visionFeature (linguistics)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a phase-based binarization model for ancient document images is proposed, as well as a postprocessing method that can improve any binarization method and a ground truth generation tool. Three feature maps derived from the phase information of an input document image constitute the core of this binarization model. These features are the maximum moment of phase congruency covariance, a locally weighted mean phase angle, and a phase preserved denoised image. The proposed model consists of three standard steps: 1) preprocessing; 2) main binarization; and 3) postprocessing. In the preprocessing and main binarization steps, the features used are mainly phase derived, while in the postprocessing step, specialized adaptive Gaussian and median filters are considered. One of the outputs of the binarization step, which shows high recall performance, is used in a proposed postprocessing method to improve the performance of other binarization methodologies. Finally, we develop a ground truth generation tool, called PhaseGT, to simplify and speed up the ground truth generation process for ancient document images. The comprehensive experimental results on the DIBCO'09, H-DIBCO'10, DIBCO'11, H-DIBCO'12, DIBCO'13, PHIBD'12, and BICKLEY DIARY data sets show the robustness of the proposed binarization method on various types of degradation and document images.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations64
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207