MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2276109766

Learning Image Dictionary using Non-negative Matrix Factorization and K-SVD

2015· article· en· W2276109766 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Petri Luukkonen

Bibliographic record

VenueTyöväentutkimus Vuosikirja · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTechnion-Israel Institute of TechnologyNational Taiwan UniversityUniversity of WaterlooHelsingin Yliopisto
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceMatrix decompositionSingular value decompositionComputer scienceNon-negative matrix factorizationPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Computer visionMathematicsAlgorithmPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, a theoretical background of algorithms called NLS-BB-NMF and K-SVD for computing the image dictionary have been introduced. The NLS-BB-NMF algorithm computes the matrix factorization V ≈ WH of the training data matrix V (in our case the set of image patches from training image) using gradient descent methods by applying non-negative constraint on matrices W and H. The K-SVD in turn computes the matrix factorization WH applying sparsity constraint on the coefficient matrix H using Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP) and Singular Value Decomposition (SVD). In the factorization, matrix W is the so called dictionary and it contains features, also called atoms, of the data V . The atoms serve as a building blocks of the original data, and they are also assumed to represent data that is similar to the training data V .\n\nThe testing of the methods were carried in two phases. Initially, in the so called training phase, the dictionary was learned by the algorithms from a training image. The visual structure of the atoms learned by the algorithms were notably different although the approximations WH made by both dictionaries were visually very close to the original image. The visual difference between the learned dictionaries was seen as a consequence of the sparsity constraint that was forced for the coefficient matrix in K-SVD but not in NLS-BB-NMF.\n\nSecondly, in the test phase, a test image with various noise levels was approximated using the learned dictionary. The algorithms were able to produce approximations that were closer to the clean test image than the noisy test image. This was seen as the effect of dictionaries whose atoms were representing only the features of clean images.\n\nThis observation led to a second test where the algorithms were tested to compute the denoised reconstructions of the test image with varying noise levels by using an extended dictionary containing additionally atoms learned from a noise sample.\n\nThe qualities of the reconstructions were evaluated by using the Frobenius matrix norm and Structural Similarity (ssim) index that has been observed to adapt better the visual perception of human eyes.

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 score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.709

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTyöväentutkimus VuosikirjaSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207