MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068556905 · doi:10.1109/crv.2013.27

A Measure of Perceptual Aliasing in Image Descriptors

2013· article· en· W2068556905 on OpenAlexaff
Jiemin Wang, Hong Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)AliasingComputer scienceComputer visionImage (mathematics)Cluster analysisCurse of dimensionalityFeature (linguistics)Spectral clusteringSimilarity (geometry)Matching (statistics)Face (sociological concept)PerceptionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers exploring problems in image matching tasks face the curse of perceptual aliasing that is originally used in characterizing a sensing process. Perceptual aliasing occurs when the one-to-one mapping relations between world states (objects) and their representations (descriptors) are not maintained. In this paper, we introduce a novel method for quantifying perceptual aliasing. Our method measures the discriminating power of an image descriptor in terms of its ability to distinguish between images of different objects and to match images of the same object. To illustrate our method, we apply it in the evaluation of popular global image descriptors that do not require local feature or keypoint detection. Specifically, our method runs spectral clustering on the similarity matrix computed with descriptors of known image clusters and measures the performance of an image descriptor by its ability to maintain the original clusters, using two indices, MRI-1 and MRI-2, that are based on Rand index.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.260

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207