MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153577662 · doi:10.1109/icip.2009.5413886

A novel approach for computing and pooling Structural SIMilarity index in the discrete wavelet domain

2009· article· en· W2153577662 on OpenAlexafffund
Soroosh Rezazadeh, Stéphane Coulombe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPoolingStructural similaritySimilarity (geometry)WaveletMetric (unit)Pattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceMathematicsFeature (linguistics)AlgorithmImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The structural similarity (SSIM) index is an objective metric that gives relatively accurate similarity prediction scores with reasonable complexity. In this paper, an excellent trade-off between accuracy and complexity is presented in the form of a wavelet structural similarity index (WSSI), which is more accurate and less complex than the spatial SSIM index. Like the spatial SSIM index, the WSSI has the feature of boundedness. It computes an edge structural similarity map and an approximation structural similarity map to obtain the final similarity score. A contrast map is introduced in the wavelet domain for pooling structural similarity maps. Experimental results show that the low-complexity WSSI gives a correlation coefficient of 0.9548 between objective and subjective scores, and competes with visual information fidelity (VIF) 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207