Bibliographic record
Abstract
Processing of image windows rather than complete images is useful for robots incorporating visual servoing as high image processing rates are required. Each image window is segmented, often by thresholding, to identify features of interest. To adapt to changing conditions and to achieve the thresholding of low contrast and shadowed windows, a sophisticated method for performing dynamic segmentation is required. Segmentation methods from the pattern recognition and optical character recognition fields were studied to determine their effectiveness at thresholding 32 by 32 pixel image windows of circular hole features. The segmentation technique must be capable of preserving the centroid location with sub-pixel accuracy. To this end a new morphological preprocessing method is introduced to improve the performance of most thresholding algorithms. It was found that this new preprocessing method was able to improve the centroid location error by nearly 40% when Yasuda's thresholding algorithm was used. The preprocessing algorithm in combination with Yasuda's thresholding algorithm was able to segment the holes with an average centroid location error of 0.423 pixels and a standard deviation of 0.328 pixels.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".