MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102681574 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2004.30

Gaussian MRF rotation-invariant features for image classification

2004· article· en· W2102681574 on OpenAlexaff
Huawu Deng, David A. Clausi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceInvariant (physics)GaussianComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)IsotropyRotation (mathematics)Blob detectionMarkov random fieldFourier transformAlgorithmComputer visionMathematicsImage processingImage segmentationImage (mathematics)Edge detectionMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Features based on Markov random field (MRF) models are sensitive to texture rotation. This paper develops an anisotropic circular Gaussian MRF (ACGMRF) model for retrieving rotation-invariant texture features. To overcome the singularity problem of the least squares estimate method, an approximate least squares estimate method is designed and implemented. Rotation-invariant features are obtained from the ACGMRF model parameters using the discrete Fourier transform. The ACGMRF model is demonstrated to be a statistical improvement over three published methods. The three methods include a Laplacian pyramid, an isotropic circular GMRF (ICGMRF), and gray level cooccurrence probability features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations153
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207