MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162011993 · doi:10.1109/tip.2008.921985

Robust Global Motion Estimation Oriented to Video Object Segmentation

2008· article· en· W2162011993 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Qi, Mohammed Ghazal, A. Amer

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMotion estimationOutlierComputer scienceQuarter-pixel motionMotion compensationSegmentationBlock-matching algorithmImage segmentationCoding (social sciences)Video trackingPattern recognition (psychology)Object (grammar)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most global motion estimation (GME) methods are oriented to video coding while video object segmentation methods either assume no global motion (GM) or directly adopt a coding-oriented method to compensate for GM. This paper proposes a hierarchical differential GME method oriented to video object segmentation. A scheme which combines three-step search and motion parameters prediction is proposed for initial estimation to increase efficiency. A robust estimator that uses object information to reject outliers introduced by local motion is also proposed. For the first frame, when the object information is unavailable, a robust estimator is proposed which rejects outliers by examining their distribution in local neighborhoods of the error between the current and the motion-compensated previous frame. Subjective and objective results show that the proposed method is more robust, more oriented to video object segmentation, and faster than the referenced methods.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations39
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207