MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113894747 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2006.207

Graphical Models and Point Pattern Matching

2006· article· en· W2113894747 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGraph Theory and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorAustralian GovernmentNational ICT Australia
KeywordsEuclidean geometry3-dimensional matchingMatching (statistics)AlgorithmTime complexityGraphical modelMathematicsGraphEuclidean distancePoint (geometry)Mathematical optimizationPolynomialDimension (graph theory)Blossom algorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a novel solution to the rigid point pattern matching problem in Euclidean spaces of any dimension. Although we assume rigid motion, jitter is allowed. We present a noniterative, polynomial time algorithm that is guaranteed to find an optimal solution for the noiseless case. First, we model point pattern matching as a weighted graph matching problem, where weights correspond to Euclidean distances between nodes. We then formulate graph matching as a problem of finding a maximum probability configuration in a graphical model. By using graph rigidity arguments, we prove that a sparse graphical model yields equivalent results to the fully connected model in the noiseless case. This allows us to obtain an algorithm that runs in polynomial time and is provably optimal for exact matching between noiseless point sets. For inexact matching, we can still apply the same algorithm to find approximately optimal solutions. Experimental results obtained by our approach show improvements in accuracy over current methods, particularly when matching patterns of different sizes.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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