MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041027694 · doi:10.1109/icip.2010.5653405

Generic image similarity based on Kolmogorov complexity

2010· article· en· W2041027694 on OpenAlexafffund
Nima Nikvand, Zhou Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputability, Logic, AI Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKolmogorov complexitySimilarity (geometry)Image (mathematics)Computer scienceSet (abstract data type)Range (aeronautics)Theoretical computer scienceImage retrievalComputational complexity theoryKey (lock)Image processingImage compressionAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image similarity measurement is a fundamental and common issue in a broad range of problems in image processing, compression, communication, recognition and retrieval. Existing image similarity measures are limited to restricted application environments. The theory of Kolmogorov complexity and the related normalized information distance (NID) measure provide an attractive theoretic framework for generic image similarity that is applicable to any scenario. While this is appealing, the difficulty lies in the implementation due to the non-computable nature of Kolmogorov complexity. In this paper, we propose a practical framework to approximate NID, where the key is to find the shortest program within a set of potential transformations that convert one image to another and vice versa. As one of the initial attempts in this new and promising research direction, our preliminary experimental work demonstrates the wider applicability of the proposed approach than existing methods.

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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations26
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputability, Logic, AI AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207