MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047808289 · doi:10.1167/7.8.15

Inducing features from visual noise

2007· article· en· W2047808289 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew L. Cohen, Richard M. Shiffrin, Jason M. Gold, David A. Ross, Michael Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Eye InstituteNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceNoise (video)Unitary stateObject (grammar)Task (project management)Pattern recognition (psychology)PixelCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionLine (geometry)Expression (computer science)Visual ObjectsComputer visionImage (mathematics)MathematicsPerceptionPsychologyNeuroscienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present new experimental and mathematical techniques aimed at determining the features used in visual object recognition. We conceive of these features as the parts of an object that are treated as unitary wholes when recognizing or discriminating visual objects. For example, consider a task classifying a visual target presented in pixel noise as a "P" or a "Q". The features may correspond to particular shapes of the target letters. Two such features for "P", for example, might be a vertical line and upper-right-facing curve. The decision may be encoded in terms of particular values of such features, and an appropriate combination of these values may determine how the expression is perceived. We utilize recent advances in statistical machine learning techniques to uncover the features used by human observers.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207