MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040991168 · doi:10.1109/conielecomp.2009.63

Tutorial III: Image Processing and Analysis with Matlab

2009· article· en· W2040991168 on OpenAlexaff
Julian Guerrero

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMATLABComputer scienceGraphical user interfaceCoding (social sciences)Image processingSource codeProcess (computing)Variety (cybernetics)User interfaceComputer engineeringProgramming languageEngineering drawingComputer hardwareSoftware engineeringHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Matlab is an extremely useful tool during the development and testing of a wide variety of applications. With built in ready-to-use functions that have been optimized for fast execution, and easy access to toolboxes and user generated contributions, it is possible to quickly implement and test various approaches before committing to a single one during the research and development process. In addition, if used properly, Matlab's graphical user interface (GUI) and display functions can help visualize your data without spending hours coding in more complex languages and still retain the complexity provided by these alternatives. This workshop will address using Matlab, Matlab Toolboxes and user contributed functions specifically with respect to image processing, analysis and display. We will review which related functions are included in Matlab, how to use them properly, and what the limitations of these functions are. We will also go over some strategies for implementing your own functions, identifying bottlenecks, and some suggestions on how to use the GUI and related functions to present your data. Examples of Matlab code used in the development of a deep vein thrombosis screening system will be presented. It is expected that participants will be somewhat familiar with coding in Matlab, and have an interest in image processing and analysis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.081

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.392 · 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 designNot applicable
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 topicArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207