MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141834896 · doi:10.1109/iccv.2013.222

GrabCut in One Cut

2013· article· en· W2141834896 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
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCutSegmentationImage segmentationRegularization (linguistics)Computer scienceSimple (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsGraphPattern recognition (psychology)Theoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among image segmentation algorithms there are two major groups: (a) methods assuming known appearance models and (b) methods estimating appearance models jointly with segmentation. Typically, the first group optimizes appearance log-likelihoods in combination with some spacial regularization. This problem is relatively simple and many methods guarantee globally optimal results. The second group treats model parameters as additional variables transforming simple segmentation energies into high-order NP-hard functionals (Zhu-Yuille, Chan-Vese, Grab Cut, etc). It is known that such methods indirectly minimize the appearance overlap between the segments. We propose a new energy term explicitly measuring L1 distance between the object and background appearance models that can be globally maximized in one graph cut. We show that in many applications our simple term makes NP-hard segmentation functionals unnecessary. Our one cut algorithm effectively replaces approximate iterative optimization techniques based on block coordinate descent.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations228
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207