MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055109067 · doi:10.1063/1.4894763

Multifractal detrended moving average analysis for texture representation

2014· article· en· W2055109067 on OpenAlexaff
Fang Wang, Lin Wang, Ruibiao Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicComplex Systems and Time Series Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetrended fluctuation analysisHurst exponentMultifractal systemMathematicsExponentFractalAlgorithmStatistical physicsStatisticsMathematical analysisPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multifractal detrended moving average analysis (MF-DMA) is recently employed to detect long-range correlation and multifractal nature in stationary and non-stationary time series. In this paper, we propose a method to calculate the generalized Hurst exponent for each pixel of a surface based on MF-DMA, which we call the MF-DMA-based local generalized Hurst exponent. These exponents form a matrix, which we denote by LHq. These exponents are similar to the multifractal detrended fluctuation analysis (MF-DFA)-based local generalized Hurst exponent. The performance of the calculated LHq is tested for two synthetic multifractal surfaces and ten randomly chosen natural textures with analytical solutions under three cases, namely, backward (θ = 0), centered (θ = 0.5), and forward (θ = 1) with different q values and different sub-image sizes. Two sets of comparison segmentation experiments between the three cases of the MF-DMA-based LHq and the MF-DFA-based LHq show that the MF-DMA-based LHq is superior to the MF-DFA-based LHq. In addition, the backward MF-DMA algorithm is more efficient than the centered and forward algorithms. An interest finding is that the LHq with q < 0 outperforms the LHq with q > 0 in characterizing the image features of natural textures for both the MF-DMA and MF-DFA algorithms.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicComplex Systems and Time Series AnalysisFrench-language works237,207