MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162576539 · doi:10.1109/cisda.2009.5356556

Robust line extraction based on repeated segment directions on image contours

2009· article· en· W2162576539 on OpenAlexaff
Andrés Solís Montero, Amiya Nayak, Miloš Stojmenović, Nejib Zaguia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Object Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceExtraction (chemistry)Line (geometry)Image (mathematics)Image segmentationFeature extractionLine segmentPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a new line segment detection and extraction algorithm for computer vision, image segmentation, and shape recognition applications. This is an important pre processing step in detecting, recognizing and classifying military hardware in images. This algorithm uses a compilation of different image processing steps such as normalization, Gaussian smooth, thresholding, and Laplace edge detection to extract edge contours from colour input images. Contours of each connected component are divided into short segments, which are classified by their orientation into nine discrete categories. Straight lines are recognized as the minimal number of such consecutive short segments with the same direction. This solution gives us a surprisingly more accurate, faster and simpler answer with fewer parameters than the widely used Hough Transform algorithm for detecting lines segments among any orientation and location inside images. Its easy implementation, simplicity, speed, the ability to divide an edge into straight line segments using the actual morphology of objects, inclusion of endpoint information, and the use of the OpenCV library are key features and advantages of this solution procedure. The algorithm was tested on several simple shape images as well as real pictures giving more accuracy than the actual procedures based in Hough Transform. This line detection algorithm is robust to image transformations such as rotation, scaling and translation, and to the selection of parameter values.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Object Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207