MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028735463 · doi:10.1109/tip.2014.2325777

BRINT: Binary Rotation Invariant and Noise Tolerant Texture Classification

2014· article· en· W2028735463 on OpenAlexaff
Li Liu, Yunli Long, Paul Fieguth, Songyang Lao, Guoying Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLocal binary patternsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceHistogramRobustness (evolution)Gaussian noiseMathematicsBinary numberNoise (video)Noise measurementComputer scienceSpeckle noiseCluster analysisInvariant (physics)Salt-and-pepper noiseComputer visionNoise reductionImage processingMedian filterSpeckle patternImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a simple, efficient, yet robust multiresolution approach to texture classification-binary rotation invariant and noise tolerant (BRINT). The proposed approach is very fast to build, very compact while remaining robust to illumination variations, rotation changes, and noise. We develop a novel and simple strategy to compute a local binary descriptor based on the conventional local binary pattern (LBP) approach, preserving the advantageous characteristics of uniform LBP. Points are sampled in a circular neighborhood, but keeping the number of bins in a single-scale LBP histogram constant and small, such that arbitrarily large circular neighborhoods can be sampled and compactly encoded over a number of scales. There is no necessity to learn a texton dictionary, as in methods based on clustering, and no tuning of parameters is required to deal with different data sets. Extensive experimental results on representative texture databases show that the proposed BRINT not only demonstrates superior performance to a number of recent state-of-the-art LBP variants under normal conditions, but also performs significantly and consistently better in presence of noise due to its high distinctiveness and robustness. This noise robustness characteristic of the proposed BRINT is evaluated quantitatively with different artificially generated types and levels of noise (including Gaussian, salt and pepper, and speckle noise) in natural texture 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)0.002
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 score0.002
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
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations206
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207