MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036733311 · doi:10.1109/wisp.2007.4447575

A Genetic Programming Approach for Classification of Textures Based on Wavelet Analysis

2007· article· en· W2036733311 on OpenAlexaff
Zheng Chen, Siwei Lu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEvolutionary Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceGenetic programmingComputer scienceWaveletContextual image classificationMajority ruleClass (philosophy)Energy (signal processing)Set (abstract data type)Texture (cosmology)Wavelet transformImage (mathematics)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a method for classifying textures using Genetic Programming (GP). Texture features are extracted from the energy of subimages of the wavelet decomposition. The GP is then used to evolve rules, which are arithmetic combinations of energy features, to identify whether a texture image belongs to certain class. Instead of using only one rule to discriminate the samples, a set of rules are used to perform the prediction by applying the majority voting technique. In our experiment results based on Brodatz dataset, the proposed method has achieved 99.6% test accuracy on an average. In addition, the experiment results also show that classification rules generated by this approach are robust to some noises on textures.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolutionary Algorithms and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207