MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156628608 · doi:10.5565/rev/elcvia.158

Gray-level Texture Characterization Based on a New Adaptive Nonlinear Auto-Regressive Filter

2008· article· en· W2156628608 on OpenAlex

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

VenueELCVIA Electronic Letters on Computer Vision and Image Analysis · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNonlinear systemAdaptive filterMathematicsParametric statisticsFilter (signal processing)Kernel adaptive filterExponential functionAlgorithmComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceApplied mathematicsFilter designPattern recognition (psychology)StatisticsComputer visionMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a new nonlinear exponential adaptive two-dimensional (2-D) filter for texturecharacterization. The filter adaptive coefficients are updated with the Least Mean Square (LMS) algorithm. Theproposed nonlinear model is used for texture characterization with a 2-D Auto-Regressive (AR) adaptive model. Themain advantage of the new nonlinear exponential adaptive 2-D filter is the reduced number of coefficients used tocharacterize the nonlinear image regarding the 2-D second-order Volterra model. Whatever the degree of the nonlinearity,the problem results in the same number of coefficients as in the linear case. The characterization efficiency ofthe proposed exponential model is compared to the one provided by both 2-D linear and Volterra filters and the cooccurrencematrix method. The comparison is based on two criteria usually used to evaluate the features discriminatingability and the class quantification in characterization techniques. The first criterion is proposed to quantify theclassification accuracy based on a weighted Euclidean distance classifier. The second criterion is the characterizationdegree based on the ratio of ";;;;;;;between-class";;;;;;; variances with respect to ";;;;;;;within-class";;;;;;; variances of the estimatedcoefficients. Extensive experiments proved that the exponential model coefficients give better results in texturediscrimination than several other parametric characterization methods even in a noisy context.Key words: Image Analysis, 2-D nonlinear filter, 2-D adaptive filter, texture characterization.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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