An Extension of the Standard Mixture Model for Image Segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Standard gaussian mixture modeling (GMM) is a well-known method for image segmentation. However, the pixels themselves are considered independent of each other, making the segmentation result sensitive to noise. To reduce the sensitivity of the segmented result with respect to noise, Markov random field (MRF) models provide a powerful way to account for spatial dependences between image pixels. However, their main drawback is that they are computationally expensive to implement, and require large numbers of parameters. Based on these considerations, we propose an extension of the standard GMM for image segmentation, which utilizes a novel approach to incorporate the spatial relationships between neighboring pixels into the standard GMM. The proposed model is easy to implement and compared with MRF models, requires lesser number of parameters. We also propose a new method to estimate the model parameters in order to minimize the higher bound on the data negative log-likelihood, based on the gradient method. Experimental results obtained on noisy synthetic and real world grayscale images demonstrate the robustness, accuracy and effectiveness of the proposed model in image segmentation, as compared to other methods based on standard GMM and MRF models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".