Hyperspectral image visualization based on a human visual model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperspectral image data can provide very fine spectral resolution with more than 200 bands, yet presents challenges for visualization techniques for displaying such rich information on a tristimulus monitor. This study developed a visualization technique by taking advantage of both the consistent natural appearance of a true color image and the feature separation of a PCA image based on a biologically inspired visual attention model. The key part is to extract the informative regions in the scene. The model takes into account human contrast sensitivity functions and generates a topographic saliency map for both images. This is accomplished using a set of linear "center-surround" operations simulating visual receptive fields as the difference between fine and coarse scales. A difference map between the saliency map of the true color image and that of the PCA image is derived and used as a mask on the true color image to select a small number of interesting locations where the PCA image has more salient features than available in the visible bands. The resulting representations preserve hue for vegetation, water, road etc., while the selected attentional locations may be analyzed by more advanced algorithms.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".