MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116578356 · doi:10.1109/iccv.2011.6126330

Recursive MDL via graph cuts: Application to segmentation

2011· article· en· W2116578356 on OpenAlexaff
Lena Gorelick, Andrew Delong, Olga Veksler, Yuri Boykov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinimum description lengthSegmentationMaxima and minimaHierarchyImage (mathematics)Image segmentationAlgorithmRepresentation (politics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel patch-based image representation that is useful because it (1) inherently detects regions with repetitive structure at multiple scales and (2) yields a parameterless hierarchical segmentation. We describe an image by breaking it into coherent regions where each region is well-described (easily reconstructed) by repeatedly instantiating a patch using a set of simple transformations. In other words, a good segment is one that has sufficient repetition of some pattern, and a patch is useful if it contains a pattern that is repeated in the image. Our criterion is naturally expressed by the well-established minimum description length (MDL) principle. MDL prefers spatially coherent regions with consistent appearance and avoids parameter tuning. We minimize the description length (in bits) of the image by encoding it with patches. Because a patch is itself an image, we measure its description length by applying the same idea recursively: encode a patch by breaking it into regions described by yet simpler patches. The resulting hierarchy of inter-dependent patches naturally leads to a hierarchical segmentation. We minimize description length over our class of image representations (all patch hierarchies / partitions). We formulate this problem as a recursive multi-label energy. Existing optimization techniques are either inapplicable or get stuck in poor local minima. We propose a new hierarchical fusion (HF) algorithm for energies containing a hierarchy of 'label costs'. Our algorithm is a contribution in itself and should be useful for this new and difficult class of energies.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207