MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107038438 · doi:10.1109/tip.2010.2062195

Combined Invariants to Similarity Transformation and to Blur Using Orthogonal Zernike Moments

2010· article· en· W2107038438 on OpenAlexaff
Beijing Chen, Huazhong Shu, Hui Zhang, Gouenou Coatrieux, Limin Luo, Jean-Louis Coatrieux

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZernike polynomialsArtificial intelligenceInvariant (physics)Robustness (evolution)Matrix similarityMathematicsVelocity MomentsPattern recognition (psychology)Convolution (computer science)Similarity (geometry)Transformation (genetics)AlgorithmMoment (physics)Computer visionComputer scienceMathematical analysisImage (mathematics)Artificial neural networkOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The derivation of moment invariants has been extensively investigated in the past decades. In this paper, we construct a set of invariants derived from Zernike moments which is simultaneously invariant to similarity transformation and to convolution with circularly symmetric point spread function (PSF). Two main contributions are provided: the theoretical framework for deriving the Zernike moments of a blurred image and the way to construct the combined geometric-blur invariants. The performance of the proposed descriptors is evaluated with various PSFs and similarity transformations. The comparison of the proposed method with the existing ones is also provided in terms of pattern recognition accuracy, template matching and robustness to noise. Experimental results show that the proposed descriptors perform on the overall better.

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations58
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207