Multivariate Image Segmentation Using Semantic Region Growing With Adaptive Edge Penalty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multivariate image segmentation is a challenging task, influenced by large intraclass variation that reduces class distinguishability as well as increased feature space sparseness and solution space complexity that impose computational cost and degrade algorithmic robustness. To deal with these problems, a Markov random field (MRF) based multivariate segmentation algorithm called "multivariate iterative region growing using semantics" (MIRGS) is presented. In MIRGS, the impact of intraclass variation and computational cost are reduced using the MRF spatial context model incorporated with adaptive edge penalty and applied to regions. Semantic region growing starting from watershed over-segmentation and performed alternatively with segmentation gradually reduces the solution space size, which improves segmentation effectiveness. As a multivariate iterative algorithm, MIRGS is highly sensitive to initial conditions. To suppress initialization sensitivity, it employs a region-level k -means (RKM) based initialization method, which consistently provides accurate initial conditions at low computational cost. Experiments show the superiority of RKM relative to two commonly used initialization methods. Segmentation tests on a variety of synthetic and natural multivariate images demonstrate that MIRGS consistently outperforms three other published 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".