Image Re-ranking Acceleration on GPUs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Huge image collections are becoming available lately. In this scenario, the use of Content-Based Image Retrieval (CBIR) systems has emerged as a promising approach to support image searches. The objective of CBIR systems is to retrieve the most similar images in a collection, given a query image, by taking into account image visual properties such as texture, color, and shape. In these systems, the effectiveness of the retrieval process depends heavily on the accuracy of ranking approaches. Recently, re-ranking approaches have been proposed to improve the effectiveness of CBIR systems by taking into account the relationships among images. The re-ranking approaches consider the relationships among all images in a given dataset. These approaches typically demands a huge amount of computational power, which hampers its use in practical situations. On the other hand, these methods can be massively parallelized. In this paper, we propose to speedup the computation of the RL-Sim algorithm, a recently proposed image re-ranking approach, by using the computational power of Graphics Processing Units (GPU). GPUs are emerging as relatively inexpensive parallel processors that are becoming available on a wide range of computer systems. We address the image re-ranking performance challenges by proposing a parallel solution designed to fit the computational model of GPUs. We conducted an experimental evaluation considering different implementations and devices. Experimental results demonstrate that significant performance gains can be obtained. Our approach achieves speedups of 7x from serial implementation considering the overall algorithm and up to 36x on its core steps.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".