MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125554047 · doi:10.1109/crv.2013.25

Existence Detection of Objects in Images for Robot Vision Using Saliency Histogram Features

2013· article· en· W2125554047 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceHistogramComputer visionComputer scienceObject detectionObject (grammar)RobotHistogram of oriented gradientsRoboticsImage (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In robotics and computer vision, saliency maps are frequently used to identify regions that contain potential objects of interest and to restrict object detection to those regions only. However, common saliency approaches do not provide information as to whether there really is an interesting object triggering saliency and therefore tend to highlight needless background as potential regions of interest. This paper addresses the problem by exploiting histogram features extracted from saliency maps to predict the existence of interesting objects in images and to quickly prune uninteresting images. To validate our approach, we constructed a database that consists of 1000 background and object images captured in the working environment of our robot. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach achieves good detection performance and outperforms an existing existence detection approach [1].

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207