MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112717538 · doi:10.1145/1553374.1553413

Learning to segment from a few well-selected training images

2009· article· en· W2112717538 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
TopicMachine Learning and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMagyar Tudományos Akadémia Számítástechnikai és Automatizálási Kutatóintézet
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceDiscriminative modelMarket segmentationSegmentationImage segmentationOraclePattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionTask (project management)Image (mathematics)Field (mathematics)Contextual image classificationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We address the task of actively learning a segmentation system: given a large number of unsegmented images, and access to an oracle that can segment a given image, decide which images to provide, to quickly produce a segmenter (here, a discriminative random field) that is accurate over this distribution of images. We extend the standard models for active learner to define a system for this task that first selects the image whose expected label will reduce the uncertainty of the other unlabeled images the most, and then after greedily selects, from the pool of unsegmented images, the most informative image. The results of our experiments, over two real-world datasets (segmenting brain tumors within magnetic resonance images; and segmenting the sky in real images) show that training on very few informative images (here, as few as 2) can produce a segmenter that is as good as training on the entire dataset.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207