MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128370414 · doi:10.1142/s0218001403002307

NEW BINARY MORPHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS FOR EFFECTIVE LOW-COST BOUNDARY DETECTION

2003· article· en· W2128370414 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

VenueInternational Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoundary (topology)Computer scienceBinary numberImplementationFLOPSArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmParallel computingArithmeticMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, new operational definitions of binary morphological, both conditional and nonconditional, operations are proposed. The new operations are applied to detect boundary points from binary images. Comparisons of boundary detection algorithms using proposed, standard morphological, and gradient-based operations, showing the effectiveness of the proposed operations, are given. Comparative hardware implementations of standard and proposed morphological operations are also given. Main distinguishing aspects of the new operations are: speed and low hardware implementation (i.e., e.g., low number of buffers and D-Flip–Flops).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.346
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