MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105464770 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2006.200

Multiclass Object Recognition with Sparse, Localized Features

2006· article· en· W2105464770 on OpenAlexaff
Jim Mutch, David Lowe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePoolingObject (grammar)Cognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)CategorizationMatching (statistics)Position (finance)Class (philosophy)Task (project management)Computer visionScale (ratio)Feature extractionMachine learningMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply a biologically inspired model of visual object recognition to the multiclass object categorization problem. Our model modifies that of Serre, Wolf, and Poggio. As in that work, we first apply Gabor filters at all positions and scales; feature complexity and position/scale invariance are then built up by alternating template matching and max pooling operations. We refine the approach in several biologically plausible ways, using simple versions of sparsification and lateral inhibition. We demonstrate the value of retaining some position and scale information above the intermediate feature level. Using feature selection we arrive at a model that performs better with fewer features. Our final model is tested on the Caltech 101 object categories and the UIUC car localization task, in both cases achieving state-of-the-art performance. The results strengthen the case for using this class of model in computer vision.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations459
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207