MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2180218391 · doi:10.1109/acit-csi.2015.60

Feature Point Based Polyp Tracking in Endoscopic Videos

2015· article· en· W2180218391 on OpenAlexaff
Aashish Amber, Yuji Iwahori, M. K. Bhuyan, Robert J. Woodham, Kunio Kasugai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionScale-invariant feature transformComputer scienceAffine transformationFeature extractionFeature (linguistics)HomographyFocus (optics)Window (computing)Frame (networking)Pattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been various research conducted in polyp detection in endoscopic videos but not much has been done in the field of polyp tracking in endoscopic videos which itself is a very challenging task because of the nature of endoscopic videos. This paper discusses a modified method of polyp detection and proposes a feature point based polyp tracking method which is first in this field. Once polyp is detected, with Affine-SIFT (ASIFT) feature points extraction and matching we locate it in the next frame. Then we compute the polyp's image position with homography constraints and set up an interest window to accommodate it. In the tracking phase, we only focus on the interest window, detecting feature points from the window and updating the window's position and size until the polyps goes out of the frame. Results shows that Affine-SIFT (ASIFT) being a fully affine invariant image comparison method does works really well in endoscopic videos compares to SIFT and SURF.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207