MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147393459 · doi:10.1155/asp.2005.1834

Optimized Multichannel Filter Bank with Flat Frequency Response for Texture Segmentation

2005· article· en· W2147393459 on OpenAlexaff
Nezamoddin N. Kachouie, Javad Alirezaie

Bibliographic record

VenueEURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal Processing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFilter bankArtificial intelligenceGabor filterComputer scienceFilter (signal processing)SegmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionFeature (linguistics)Frequency domainImage textureFeature extractionScale-space segmentationImage segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous approaches to texture analysis and segmentation use multichannel filtering by applying a set of filters in the frequency domain or a set of masks in the spatial domain. This paper presents two new texture segmentation algorithms based on multichannel filtering in conjunction with neural networks for feature extraction and segmentation. The features extracted by Gabor filters have been applied for image segmentation and analysis. Suitable choices of filter parameters and filter bank coverage in the frequency domain to optimize the filters are discussed. Here we introduce two methods to optimize Gabor filter bank. First, a Gabor filter bank with a flat response is implemented and the optimal feature dimension is extracted by competitive networks. Second, a subset of Gabor filter bank is selected to compose the best discriminative filters, so that each filter in this small set can discriminate a pair of textures in a given image. In both approaches, multilayer perceptrons are employed to segment the extracted features. The comparisons of segmentation results generated using the proposed methods and previous research using Gabor, discrete cosine transform (DCT), and Laws filters are presented. Finally, the segmentation results generated by applying the optimized filter banks to textured images are presented and discussed.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEURASIP Journal on Advances in Signal ProcessingSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207