MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122321062 · doi:10.1090/qam/1788425

Shape recognition via Wasserstein distance

2000· article· lv· W2122321062 on OpenAlexaff
Wilfrid Gangbo, Robert J. McCann

Bibliographic record

VenueQuarterly of Applied Mathematics · 2000
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAbsolute continuityMathematicsOmegaLebesgue measureDomain (mathematical analysis)CombinatoricsRegular polygonImage (mathematics)Lebesgue integrationConcave functionConvex functionUnit (ring theory)Convex conjugateMathematical analysisConvex bodyGeometryConvex optimizationPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Kantorovich-Rubinstein-Wasserstein metric defines the distance between two probability measures μ \mu and ν \nu on R d + 1 {R^{d + 1}} by computing the cheapest way to transport the mass of μ \mu onto ν \nu , where the cost per unit mass transported is a given function c ( x , y ) c\left ( x, y \right ) on R 2 d + 2 {R^{2d + 2}} . Motivated by applications to shape recognition, we analyze this transportation problem with the cost c ( x , y ) = | x − y | 2 c\left ( x, y \right ) = {\left | {x - y} \right |^2} and measures supported on two curves in the plane, or more generally on the boundaries of two domains Ω , Λ ⊂ R d + 1 \Omega , \Lambda \subset {R^{d + 1}} . Unlike the theory for measures that are absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue, it turns out not to be the case that μ − a . e . x

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.008

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations95
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuarterly of Applied MathematicsSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207