MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093000758 · doi:10.1142/s0218001401000873

CLASSIFICATION OF SIMILAR 2-D OBJECTS BY WAVELET-SPARSE-MATRIX (WSM) METHOD

2001· article· en· W2093000758 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveletArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Zernike polynomialsDiscriminative modelInvariant (physics)Matrix (chemical analysis)Computer scienceSparse matrixMoment (physics)MathematicsComputer visionAlgorithmPhysicsOpticsGaussian

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a novel method called Wavelet-Sparse-Matrix (WSM) to extract the spatial features of 2-D objects for classifying objects that have subtle differences. The differences between these objects are present in the spatial orientations of the objects, or in the local positions of points on the contours of the objects. The separable wavelets are able to distinguish these differences and to separate them into three sparse subpatterns. Sparse matrix technique has the ability to rearrange nonzero elements in a sparse matrix by moving them as close together as possible. WSM method is a combination of these two techniques which can considerably improve the distinction of slightly dissimilar objects. Experiments are conducted, which include a series of discriminative simulations and comparisons with Fourier descriptor and Zernike moment invariant. These experiments verify the feasibility and effectiveness of the WSM method.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.268 · 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