MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120102092 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2009.5090125

Colour logo and trademark retrieval and tracking in unconstrained image sequences using Colour Edge Gradient Co-occurrence Histograms

2009· article· en· W2120102092 on OpenAlexaff
Raymond Phan, Dimitrios Androutsos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsHistogramPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionVector quantizationScale-invariant feature transformComputer scienceFeature extractionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an extension of the colour edge co-occurrence histogram (CECH) object detection scheme for retrieving and tracking colour logos and trademarks in unconstrained image sequences. We introduce more accurate information to the CECH by virtue of incorporating colour edge detection using vector order statistics, producing more accurate representations of edges in images, as compared to the simple colour difference edge classification performed in the CECH. Our proposed method is thus reliant on edge gradient information, thus naming it the colour edge gradient co-occurrence histogram (CEGCH). We also use a colour quantization scheme based in the hue-saturation-value (HSV) colour space, for it is more suitable for logo and trademark retrieval, in comparison to the colour quantization scheme used with the CECH. Results illustrate that the CEGCH retrieves and tracks logos and trademarks with greater accuracy in comparison to the CECH.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207