MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164146430 · doi:10.1080/0143116031000139845

Detection of lines, line junctions and line terminations

2004· article· en· W2164146430 on OpenAlexaff
F. Deschênes, Djemel Ziou, M.-F. Auclair-Fortier

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Object Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorLine (geometry)Computer scienceEdge detectionCanny edge detectorFilter (signal processing)CurvatureAlgorithmInfinite impulse responseArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMeasure (data warehouse)Topology (electrical circuits)MathematicsImage (mathematics)Image processingDigital filterGeometryTelecommunicationsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an optimal line detector for the one-dimensional case which is derived from Canny's criteria, and an efficient approach for the detection of line junctions and line terminations. The line detector is extended to the two-dimensional case by operating separately in the x and y directions. An efficient implementation using an infinite impulse response (IIR) filter is provided. This implementation has the additional advantage that increasing the filter scale affects neither temporal nor spatial complexity. The detection algorithm for junctions and terminations is divided into two steps. First, given the lines extracted from the original image, a local measure of line curvature is estimated using the mean of the dot products of orientation vectors within a given neighbourhood. The second step involves the localization of junctions and terminations. Experimental results using several synthetic and real images demonstrate the validity of the two 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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
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

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicImage and Object Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207