MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085435911 · doi:10.1109/isspa.2012.6310475

Shape recognition on a Riemannian manifold

2012· article· en· W2085435911 on OpenAlexafffund
Youssouf Chherawala, Mohamed Cheriet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMathematicsShape analysis (program analysis)Riemannian manifoldManifold (fluid mechanics)Active shape modelRobustness (evolution)Artificial intelligenceHeat kernel signatureTopological skeletonInvariant (physics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Topology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceMathematical analysisSegmentationCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose to perform shape recognition on a Riemannian manifold. Shape representation on a manifold have the advantage to be intrinsically invariant to shape preserving transformation, such as scaling and translation. Also, shape distance can be naturally computed because Riemannian manifolds are metric spaces. We propose to use the square-root velocity manifold (SRV), which model the shape external contour as a unit-length curve. We detail a dynamic programming algorithm for curve alignment w.r.t. parameterization, which respects the unit-length constraint. Then, we increase the robustness of the SRV representation to shape deformations with additional features. In order to be resilient to occlusion, the distance between two curves is performed in two steps. First the curves are aligned and the less matching parts are removed; then the resulting curves are aligned and the distance is evaluated. Finally, a support vector machine classifier is trained based on the pairwise shape distance for a robust recognition. Promising results are obtained using state-of-the-art benchmarks.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207