MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121141217 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2010.24

Self-Validated Labeling of Markov Random Fields for Image Segmentation

2010· article· en· W2121141217 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsCutMarkov random fieldInitializationImage segmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Markov chainSegmentationMaxima and minimaRobustness (evolution)Connected-component labelingAlgorithmMathematicsScale-space segmentationMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the problem of self-validated labeling of Markov random fields (MRFs), namely to optimize an MRF with unknown number of labels. We present graduated graph cuts (GGC), a new technique that extends the binary s-t graph cut for self-validated labeling. Specifically, we use the split-and-merge strategy to decompose the complex problem to a series of tractable subproblems. In terms of Gibbs energy minimization, a suboptimal labeling is gradually obtained based upon a set of cluster-level operations. By using different optimization structures, we propose three practical algorithms: tree-structured graph cuts (TSGC), net-structured graph cuts (NSGC), and hierarchical graph cuts (HGC). In contrast to previous methods, the proposed algorithms can automatically determine the number of labels, properly balance the labeling accuracy, spatial coherence, and the labeling cost (i.e., the number of labels), and are computationally efficient, independent to initialization, and able to converge to good local minima of the objective energy function. We apply the proposed algorithms to natural image segmentation. Experimental results show that our algorithms produce generally feasible segmentations for benchmark data sets, and outperform alternative methods in terms of robustness to noise, speed, and preservation of soft boundaries.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.284 · 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