Stroke-model-based character extraction from gray-level document images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global gray-level thresholding techniques such as Otsu's method, and local gray-level thresholding techniques such as edge-based segmentation or the adaptive thresholding method are powerful in extracting character objects from simple or slowly varying backgrounds. However, they are found to be insufficient when the backgrounds include sharply varying contours or fonts in different sizes. A stroke-model is proposed to depict the local features of character objects as double-edges in a predefined size. This model enables us to detect thin connected components selectively, while ignoring relatively large backgrounds that appear complex. Meanwhile, since the stroke width restriction is fully factored in, the proposed technique can be used to extract characters in predefined font sizes. To process large volumes of documents efficiently, a hybrid method is proposed for character extraction from various backgrounds. Using the measurement of class separability to differentiate images with simple backgrounds from those with complex backgrounds, the hybrid method can process documents with different backgrounds by applying the appropriate methods. Experiments on extracting handwriting from a check image, as well as machine-printed characters from scene images demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".