MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148440013 · doi:10.1109/icfhr.2010.28

Word Spotting in Gray Scale Handwritten Pashto Documents

2010· article· en· W2148440013 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Ismail Shah, Ching Y. Suen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpottingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceHandwritingPattern recognition (psychology)Word (group theory)GrayscaleFeature vectorBinary numberHandwriting recognitionScripting languageFeature (linguistics)Speech recognitionFeature extractionNatural language processingPixelMathematicsArithmetic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present an approach for word spotting in Gray-scale Pashto Documents, written in modified Arabic scripts. Various profile and transitional features are extracted from gray-scale word images. The gray-scale feature vectors are then converted into binary feature vectors by replacing each value within the gray-scale feature vectors with its binary equivalents. In this way, we have enabled the alignment of the gray-scale feature vectors via a faster binary pattern matching algorithm, i.e., Correlation Similarity Measure (CORR). The approach has effectively handled the handwriting variations of 200 different writers. The average precision rate achieved is 94.75 % for an average recall of 60.25%. The time taken for matching every set of two word images is 1.43 ms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207