MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162339969 · doi:10.1109/tip.2005.851710

A stochastic method for Bayesian estimation of hidden Markov random field models with application to a color model

2005· article· en· W2162339969 on OpenAlexaff
François Destrempes, Max Mignotte, Jean‐François Angers

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBayesian Methods and Mixture Models
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalComputer Research Institute of Montréal
FundersHealth and Medical Research Fund
KeywordsMaximum a posteriori estimationMarkov random fieldImage segmentationMathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)Random fieldArtificial intelligenceHidden Markov modelExpectation–maximization algorithmAlgorithmEstimatorSegmentationComputer scienceMaximum likelihoodStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a new stochastic algorithm for computing useful Bayesian estimators of hidden Markov random field (HMRF) models that we call exploration/selection/estimation (ESE) procedure. The algorithm is based on an optimization algorithm of O. François, called the exploration/selection (E/S) algorithm. The novelty consists of using the a posteriori distribution of the HMRF, as exploration distribution in the E/S algorithm. The ESE procedure computes the estimation of the likelihood parameters and the optimal number of region classes, according to global constraints, as well as the segmentation of the image. In our formulation, the total number of region classes is fixed, but classes are allowed or disallowed dynamically. This framework replaces the mechanism of the split-and-merge of regions that can be used in the context of image segmentation. The procedure is applied to the estimation of a HMRF color model for images, whose likelihood is based on multivariate distributions, with each component following a Beta distribution. Meanwhile, a method for computing the maximum likelihood estimators of Beta distributions is presented. Experimental results performed on 100 natural images are reported. We also include a proof of convergence of the E/S algorithm in the case of nonsymmetric exploration graphs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations36
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicBayesian Methods and Mixture ModelsFrench-language works237,207