MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010810469 · doi:10.5566/ias.v30.p63-76

GENERALIZED FRACTAL TRANSFORMS AND SELF-SIMILARITY: RECENT RESULTS AND APPLICATIONS

2011· article· en· W2010810469 on OpenAlexafffund
Davide La Torre, Edward R. Vrscay

Bibliographic record

VenueImage Analysis & Stereology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical Dynamics and Fractals
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFractalFractal transformFractal compressionMathematicsGrayscaleSelf-similarityFractal analysisPixelImage (mathematics)Image processingImage compressionAlgorithmPure mathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMathematical analysisFractal dimensionGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most practical as well as theoretical works in image processing and mathematical imaging consider images as real-valued functions, u : X → ℝg, where X denotes the base space or pixel space over which the images are defined and ℝg ⊂ ℝ is a suitable greyscale space. A variety of function spaces ℱ(X) may be considered depending on the application. Fractal image coding seeks to approximate an image function as a union of spatially-contracted and greyscale-modified copies of subsets of itself, i.e., u ≈ Tu, where T is the so-called Generalized Fractal Transform (GFT) operator. The aim of this paper is to show some recent developments of the theory of generalized fractal transforms and how they can be used for the purpose of image analysis (compression, denoising). This includes the formulation of fractal transforms over various spaces of multifunctions, i.e., set-valued and measure-valued functions. The latter may be useful in nonlocal image processing.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.303
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueImage Analysis & StereologySame topicMathematical Dynamics and FractalsFrench-language works237,207