Mixed memory model for image processing and modeling with complex Daubechies wavelets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a statistical modeling of images based on a decomposition with complex-valued Daubechies wavelets. These wavelets possess interesting properties that can be turned into account in the modeling to obtain a better characterization of the images. This characterization is achieved by statistically modeling the wavelet coefficient distribution via hidden Markov tree model. The wavelet coefficients in an image are organized into three tree structures and this type of model has already been used successfully in this context by independently modeling each of these trees. We propose a further refinement by considering the joint modeling of the three trees with a so- called mixed memory hidden Markov tree model. The mode is base don a memory mixture, a general approach to obtain an approximation of the joint distribution in the presence of factorial Markov models. The utilization of such model s is quite general and can be applied to various signal- processing problems. To illustrate the interest of this model as well as the relevance of using complex Daubechies wavelets, we evaluate their performance for a classification and a denoising application.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".