Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An image mosaic is a rendering of a large target image by arranging a collection of small source images, often in an array, each chosen specifically to fit a particular block of the target image. Most mosaicking methods are simplistic in the sense that they break the target image into regular tiles (e.g., squares or hexagons) and take extreme shortcuts when evaluating the similarity between target tiles and source images. In this paper, we propose an efficient method to obtain higher quality mosaics that incorporate a number of process improvements. The Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) is used to compute a more fine-grained image similarity metric, allowing for optimal colour correction and arbitrarily shaped target tiles. In addition, the framework can find the optimal sub-image within a source image, further improving the quality of the matching. The similarity scores generated by these high-order cost computations are fed into a matching algorithm to find the globally-optimal assignment of source images to target tiles. Experiments show that each improvement, by itself, yields a more accurate mosaic. Combined, the innovations produce very high quality image mosaics, even with only a few hundred source images.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it