MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023958431 · doi:10.1109/icdsp.2009.5201266

COntent-based unconstrained logo and trademark retrieval in color image databases with Color Edge Gradient Co-occurrence Histograms

2009· article· en· W2023958431 on OpenAlexaff
Raymond Phan, Dimitrios Androutsos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColor histogramArtificial intelligenceColor depthColor quantizationColor imageColor normalizationColor spacePattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionMathematicsHSL and HSVHistogramHueHistogram equalizationComputer scienceImage gradientImage processingImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a logo and trademark retrieval system for general, unconstrained, color image databases, extending the color edge Co-Occurrence Histogram (CECH) object detection scheme. We introduce more accurate information to the CECH, by virtue of incorporating color edge detection using vector order statistics. This produces a more accurate representation of edges in color images, in comparison to the simple color pixel difference classification of edges as seen in the CECH. Our proposed method is thus reliant on edge gradient information, thus we call it the Color Edge Gradient Co-occurrence Histogram (CEGCH). We also introduce a novel color quantization scheme based in the Hue-Saturation-Value (HSV) color space, illustrating that it is more suitable for image retrieval in comparison to the color quantization scheme introduced with the CECH. Results illustrate that our retrieval system retrieves logos and trademarks with good accuracy, outperforming the use of the CECH in image retrieval with higher precision and recall.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207