MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112083594 · doi:10.1109/icassp.2009.4959853

Document reconstruction using dynamic programming

2009· article· en· W2112083594 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Processing and 3D Reconstruction
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamic programmingComputer scienceAlgorithmData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work we propose a methodology for document reconstruction based on dynamic programming and a modified version of the Prim's algorithm. Firstly, we use polygonal approximation to reduce the complexity of the boundaries and extract features from them. Thereafter, these features are used to feed the LCS dynamic programming algorithm. The scores yielded by the LCS algorithm are then used into a modified Prim's algorithm to find the best match among all pieces. Comprehensive experiments on a database composed of 100 shredded documents support the efficiency of the proposed methodology. When compared to global search algorithms, this approach brings an improvement of 18% in the number of fragments reconstructed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Processing and 3D ReconstructionFrench-language works237,207