MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011071923 · doi:10.1049/iet-ipr.2012.0340

Image segmentation by a new weighted Student's <i>t</i> ‐mixture model

2013· article· en· W2011071923 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Image Processing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersHealth and Medical Research FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsImage segmentationArtificial intelligenceSegmentationComputer scienceComputer visionImage (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Scale-space segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the authors introduce a new weighted Student's t ‐mixture model (WSMM) for image segmentation. Gaussian distribution and Student's t ‐distribution are the two commonly used probabilities in the finite mixture model (FMM). The Student's t ‐mixture model has come to be regarded as an alternative to Gaussian mixture models, as it is heavily tailed and more robust for outliers. Moreover, the pixels are considered independent of each other in the FMM. Although some existing methods incorporate the spatial relationship between neighbouring pixels, they do not consider the relationship between spatial information and clustering information, thus those reported methods remain sensitive to noise. The advantages of the authors method are as follows: first, the authors introduce WSMM to incorporate the local spatial information, pixel intensity value and clustering information in an image. Second, the authors model is simple, easy to implement and has a good balance between noise insensitiveness and image detail preservation. Third, they adopt the gradient method and expectation maximisation algorithm, which allow for simultaneous estimation of optimal parameters. Finally, the most useful statistical tool for image segmentation, the well‐known hidden Markov random field model, is a special case of their model. Thus, their method is general enough for model‐based techniques construction. Experimental results on synthetic and real images demonstrate the improved robustness and effectiveness of their approach.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.273 · 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