MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023528786 · doi:10.1142/s0219467804001415

AUTOMATIC IMAGE REGISTRATION USING VIRTUAL CIRCLES

2004· article· en· W2023528786 on OpenAlexafffund
Haikel Alhichri, Mohamed S. Kamel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Image and Graphics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversidade do PortoUniversity of TorontoPurdue UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsComputer visionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceSimilarity (geometry)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionSet (abstract data type)PixelImage registrationRADIUSImage (mathematics)Virtual imageComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main contribution of this work is a novel set of image features called the virtual circles and their use in the registration of images under similarity transformations. A virtual circle is a circle with maximal radius encompassing a background area that does not contain edge points. It has many useful properties such as its radius, and its dominant edge direction for example, which can be utilized for efficient registration. Furthermore, virtual circles are frequent and can be extracted efficiently with the help of the distance transform from many types of images. We have tested the new virtual circles method in the registration of 66 pairs of images, half of which are printed labels and the other half are indoor scenes. Experimental results have shown that this method has a linear complexity in terms of the number of pixels. It is also highly automatic, because it has a small number of parameters, which almost never need to be changed throughout the experiments.

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)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Image and GraphicsSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207