MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034671455 · doi:10.1080/01431160050030592

Destriping multisensor imagery with moment matching

2000· article· en· W2034671455 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

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)University of Toronto
FundersDelta WaterfowlUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsHistogramOutlierHistogram matchingMoment (physics)Artificial intelligenceMatching (statistics)Computer scienceOffset (computer science)Computer visionHistogram equalizationPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatisticsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image destriping is necessary due to sensor-to-sensor variation within instruments. This has most often been done by assuming that each sensor views a statistically similar subimage, and a histogram of each sensor's response is made to match the overall histogram. Histogram matching shows sensitivity to violations of the similarity assumption. An alternative algorithm is suggested which matches the gain and offset of each sensor to typical values, and which is resistant to the effects of outliers. Tests on a sample image show the moment matching algorithm reduces the variance between sensors to a greater degree than histogram matching.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · 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