MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113918006 · doi:10.1109/icdar.1993.395734

Thresholding using an illumination model

2002· article· en· W2113918006 on OpenAlexaff
J. R. Parker, C. Jennings, Antanas Šalkauskas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThresholdingPixelArtificial intelligenceComputer visionRaster graphicsComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most grey-level thresholding methods produce good results in situations where the illumination gradient in the original raster image is regular and not too large. In other cases, such as a large linear change in illumination, a satisfactory bi-level image cannot be produced. If the object pixels can be identified in a variety of positions throughout the image, these can be used to construct a surface whose height is related to illumination at each pixel. This estimate can be used to produce a threshold for each pixel. The method described here uses the Shen-Castan edge detector to identify object pixels, and creates a surface using a moving least squares method that can be used to threshold the image.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations32
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207