Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Image segmentation is the process of assigning a label to every pixel in an image such that pixels with the same label are connected and meaningful, and share certain visual characteristics. Pixels in a region are similar with respect to some features or property, such as color, intensity, or texture. Adjacent regions may be significantly different with respect to the same characteristics. Therefore, it is difficult for a static (non-learning) segmentation technique to accurately segment different images with different characteristics. In this paper, an evolving fuzzy system is used to segment medical images. The system uses some training images to build an initial fuzzy system which then evolves online as new images are encountered. Each new image is segmented using the evolved fuzzy system and may contribute to updating the system. This process provides better segmentation results for new images compared to static paradigms. The average of segmentation accuracy for test images is calculated by comparing every segmented image with its gold standard image prepared manually by an expert.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it