Co-parent selection for fast region merging in pyramidal image segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of image segmentation is to partition an image into regions that are internally homogeneous and heterogeneous with respect to other neighbouring regions. We build on the pyramid image segmentation work by making a more efficient method by which children chose parents within the pyramid structure. Instead of considering only four immediate parents each child node considers the neighbours of its candidate parent, and the candidate parents of its neighbouring nodes in the same level. In this paper, we also introduce the concept of a co-parent node for possible region merging at the end of each iteration. The new parents of the former children are co-parent candidates as if they are similar. The co-parent is chosen to be the one with the largest receptive field among candidate co-parents. Each child then additionally considers one more candidate, the co-parent of the previous parent. Other steps in the algorithm, and its overall layout, were also improved. The new algorithm is tested on a set of images. Our algorithm is fast (produces segmentations within seconds), results in the correct segmentation of elongated and large regions, very simple compared to plethora of existing algorithms, and appears competitive in segmentation quality with the best publicly available implementations. The major improvement over is that it produces visually appealing results at earlier levels of pyramid segmentation, and not only at the top one.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".