Object of Interest segmentation and Tracking by Using Feature Selection and Active Contours
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most image segmentation algorithms in the past are based on optimizing an objective function that aims to achieve the similarity between several low-level features to build a partition of the image into homogeneous regions. In the present paper, we propose to incorporate the relevance (selection) of the grouping features to enforce the segmentation toward the capturing of objects of interest. The relevance of the features is determined through a set of positive and negative examples of a specific object defined a priori by the user. The calculation of the relevance of the features is performed by maximizing an objective function defined on the mixture likelihoods of the positive and negative object examples sets. The incorporation of the features relevance in the object segmentation is formulated through an energy functional which is minimized by using level set active contours. We show the efficiency of the approach on several examples of object of interest segmentation and tracking where the features relevance is used.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it