MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061539841 · doi:10.1109/tip.2013.2290586

A MAP-Based Image Interpolation Method via Viterbi Decoding of Markov Chains of Interpolation Functions

2014· article· en· W2061539841 on OpenAlexaff
Farhang Vedadi, Shahram Shirani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpolation (computer graphics)Stairstep interpolationDemosaicingImage scalingNearest-neighbor interpolationBilinear interpolationMathematicsAlgorithmBicubic interpolationArtificial intelligenceViterbi algorithmComputer scienceLinear interpolationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionImage processingDecoding methodsImage (mathematics)Color image

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method of image resolution up-conversion (image interpolation) based on maximum a posteriori sequence estimation is proposed. Instead of making a hard decision about the value of each missing pixel, we estimate the missing pixels in groups. At each missing pixel of the high resolution (HR) image, we consider an ensemble of candidate interpolation methods (interpolation functions). The interpolation functions are interpreted as states of a Markov model. In other words, the proposed method undergoes state transitions from one missing pixel position to the next. Accordingly, the interpolation problem is translated to the problem of estimating the optimal sequence of interpolation functions corresponding to the sequence of missing HR pixel positions. We derive a parameter-free probabilistic model for this to-be-estimated sequence of interpolation functions. Then, we solve the estimation problem using a trellis representation and the Viterbi algorithm. Using directional interpolation functions and sequence estimation techniques, we classify the new algorithm as an adaptive directional interpolation using soft-decision estimation techniques. Experimental results show that the proposed algorithm yields images with higher or comparable peak signal-to-noise ratios compared with some benchmark interpolation methods in the literature while being efficient in terms of implementation and complexity considerations.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicAdvanced Image Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207