Face Recognition Using Fuzzy Integral and Wavelet Decomposition Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we develop a method for recognizing face images by combining wavelet decomposition, Fisherface method, and fuzzy integral. The proposed approach is comprised of four main stages. The first stage uses the wavelet decomposition that helps extract intrinsic features of face images. As a result of this decomposition, we obtain four subimages (namely approximation, horizontal, vertical, and diagonal detailed images). The second stage of the approach concerns the application of the Fisherface method to these four decompositions. The choice of the Fisherface method in this setting is motivated by its insensitivity to large variation in light direction, face pose, and facial expression. The two last phases are concerned with the aggregation of the individual classifiers by means of the fuzzy integral. Both Sugeno and Choquet type of fuzzy integral are considered as the aggregation method. In the experiments we use n-fold cross-validation to assure high consistency of the produced classification outcomes. The experimental results obtained for the Chungbuk National University (CNU) and Yale University face databases reveal that the approach presented in this paper yields better classification performance in comparison to the results obtained by other classifiers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".