MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044758250 · doi:10.1117/12.2063974

Learning to predict where human gaze is using quaternion DCT based regional saliency detection

2014· article· en· W2044758250 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ting Li, Yi Xu, Chongyang Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuaternionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceDiscrete cosine transformComputer visionSalientPattern recognition (psychology)GazeSmoothnessSimilarity (geometry)Object detectionImage (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many current visual attention approaches used semantic features to accurately capture human gaze. However, these approaches demand high computational cost and can hardly be applied to daily use. Recently, some quaternion-based saliency detection models, such as PQFT (phase spectrum of Quaternion Fourier Transform), QDCT (Quaternion Discrete Cosine Transform), have been proposed to meet real-time requirement of human gaze tracking tasks. However, current saliency detection methods used global PQFT and QDCT to locate jump edges of the input, which can hardly detect the object boundaries accurately. To address the problem, we improved QDCT-based saliency detection model by introducing superpixel-wised regional saliency detection mechanism. The local smoothness of saliency value distribution is emphasized to distinguish noises of background from salient regions. Our algorithm called saliency confidence can distinguish the patches belonging to the salient object and those of the background. It decides whether the image patches belong to the same region. When an image patch belongs to a region consisting of other salient patches, this patch should be salient as well. Therefore, we use saliency confidence map to get background weight and foreground weight to do the optimization on saliency map obtained by QDCT. The optimization is accomplished by least square method. The optimization approach we proposed unifies local and global saliency by combination of QDCT and measuring the similarity between each image superpixel. We evaluate our model on four commonly-used datasets (Toronto, MIT, OSIE and ASD) using standard precision-recall curves (PR curves), the mean absolute error (MAE) and area under curve (AUC) measures. In comparison with most state-of-art models, our approach can achieve higher consistency with human perception without training. It can get accurate human gaze even in cluttered background. Furthermore, it achieves better compromise between speed and accuracy.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207