MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129094835 · doi:10.1109/icpr.2006.354

Canonical Skeletons for Shape Matching

2006· article· en· W2129094835 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
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopological skeletonSkeleton (computer programming)Shape analysis (program analysis)Matching (statistics)Computer scienceShape optimizationMinor (academic)MathematicsActive shape modelBoundary (topology)Deformation (meteorology)Artificial intelligenceGeometryFinite element methodSegmentationMathematical analysisStructural engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skeletal representations of 2-D shape, including shock graphs, have become increasingly popular for shape matching and object recognition. However, it is well known that skeletal structure can be unstable under minor boundary deformation, part articulation, and minor shape deformation (due to, for example, small changes in viewpoint). As a result, two very similar shapes may yield two significantly different skeletal representations which, in turn, will induce a large matching distance. Such instability occurs both at external branches as well as internal branches of the skeleton. We present a framework for the structural simplification of a shape’s skeleton which balances, in an optimization framework, the desire to reduce a skeleton’s complexity by minimizing the number of branches, with the desire to maximize the skeleton’s ability to accurately reconstruct the original shape. This optimization yields a canonical skeleton whose increased stability yields significantly improved recognition performance.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.276 · 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