MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122015342 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2005.235

Multi-Image Matching Using Multi-Scale Oriented Patches

2005· article· en· W2122015342 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew Brown, Richard Szeliski, Simon Winder

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRANSACArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Invariant (physics)Computer scienceFeature extractionScale spaceMatching (statistics)Feature (linguistics)Computer visionMathematicsHaar waveletOutlierPanoramaFeature vectorWavelet transformWaveletImage (mathematics)Discrete wavelet transformImage processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a novel multi-view matching framework based on a new type of invariant feature. Our features are located at Harris corners in discrete scale-space and oriented using a blurred local gradient. This defines a rotationally invariant frame in which we sample a feature descriptor, which consists of an 8 /spl times/ 8 patch of bias/gain normalised intensity values. The density of features in the image is controlled using a novel adaptive non-maximal suppression algorithm, which gives a better spatial distribution of features than previous approaches. Matching is achieved using a fast nearest neighbour algorithm that indexes features based on their low frequency Haar wavelet coefficients. We also introduce a novel outlier rejection procedure that verifies a pairwise feature match based on a background distribution of incorrect feature matches. Feature matches are refined using RANSAC and used in an automatic 2D panorama stitcher that has been extensively tested on hundreds of sample inputs.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.329
Teacher spread0.291 · 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
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

Citations401
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207