Object detection by parts using appearance, structural and shape features
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a novel object detection algorithm with the combination of appearance, structural and shape features. We follow the paradigm of object detection by parts, which first uses detectors developed for individual parts of an object and then imposes structural constraints among the parts for the detection of the entire object. In our research, we further incorporate a priori shape information about the object parts for their detection, in order to improve the performance of the object detector. Specifically, we use an HOG-based detector for object parts whose output, together with structural constraints, is then used to seed a subsequent image segmentation step in order to delineate the potential object parts. To determine whether the segmented regions are indeed object parts, we train a part classifier using shape features of object parts and a support vector machine (SVM). The detection of the object is determined by combining the likelihoods computed with the HOG part detector, the shape-based part classifier, and the structural constraints among the parts. For validation of our object detection algorithm, we apply it to the detection of the tooth line of a mining shovel, which consists of a set of teeth with known relative position and orientation from each other, under various lighting conditions. The experimental results demonstrate that our system is able to improve the detection performance significantly when part shape information is used.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it