MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156343115 · doi:10.1109/ciisp.2007.369207

Opposition-Based Window Memoization for Morphological Algorithms

2007· article· en· W2156343115 on OpenAlex
Farzad Khalvati, Hamid R. Tizhoosh, Mark D. Aagaard

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
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemoizationComputer scienceAlgorithmSpeedupOpposition (politics)PixelArtificial intelligenceParallel computingParsing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we combine window memoization, a performance optimization technique for image processing, with opposition-based learning, a new learning scheme where the opposite of data under study is also considered in solving a problem. Window memoization combines memoization techniques from software and hardware with the repetitive nature of image data to reduce the number of calculations required for an image processing algorithm. We applied window memoization and opposition-based learning to a morphological edge detector and found that a large portion of the calculations performed on pixels neighborhoods can be skipped and instead, previously calculated results can be reused. The typical speedup for window memoization was 1.42. Combining window memoization with opposition-based learning yielded a typical increase of 5% in speedups

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.297 · 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