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
In this paper, we present a statistical parts-based model (PBM) of appearance, applied to the problem of modeling intersubject anatomical variability in magnetic resonance (MR) brain images. In contrast to global image models such as the active appearance model (AAM), the PBM consists of a collection of localized image regions, referred to as parts, whose appearance, geometry and occurrence frequency are quantified statistically. The parts-based approach explicitly addresses the case where one-to-one correspondence does not exist between all subjects in a population due to anatomical differences, as model parts are not required to appear in all subjects. The model is constructed through a fully automatic machine learning algorithm, identifying image patterns that appear with statistical regularity in a large collection of subject images. Parts are represented by generic scale-invariant features, and the model can, therefore, be applied to a wide variety of image domains. Experimentation based on 2-D MR slices shows that a PBM learned from a set of 102 subjects can be robustly fit to 50 new subjects with accuracy comparable to 3 human raters. Additionally, it is shown that unlike global models such as the AAM, PBM fitting is stable in the presence of unexpected, local perturbation.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it