MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331809639 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2016.2531645

A Novel Fusion Approach Based on the Global Consistency Criterion to Fusing Multiple Segmentations

2016· article· en· W2331809639 on OpenAlexaff
Lazhar Khelifi, Max Mignotte

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSegmentationFusionConsistency (knowledge bases)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceScale-space segmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Image segmentationGround truthSegmentation-based object categorizationImage fusionEnergy (signal processing)Fuse (electrical)Image (mathematics)Computer visionMathematicsStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we introduce a new fusion model whose objective is to fuse multiple region-based segmentation maps to get a final better segmentation result. The suggested new fusion model is based on an energy function originated from the global consistency error (GCE), a perceptual measure which takes into account the inherent multiscale nature of an image segmentation by measuring the level of refinement existing between two spatial partitions. Combined with a region merging/splitting prior, this new energy-based fusion model of label fields allows to define an interesting penalized likelihood estimation procedure based on the GCE criterion with which the fusion of basic, rapidly-computed segmentation results appears as a relevant alternative compared with other (possibly complex) segmentation techniques proposed in the image segmentation field. The performance of our fusion model was evaluated on the Berkeley dataset including various segmentations given by humans (manual ground truth segmentations). The obtained results clearly demonstrate the efficiency of this fusion model.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics SystemsSame topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207