MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2392941248

Scene Matching Algorithm based on Edge Strength and Projection Measurement

2011· article· en· W2392941248 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrocomputer applications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Algorithms and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSobel operatorComputer scienceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMatching (statistics)Projection (relational algebra)Edge detectionSimilarity (geometry)Artificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)AlgorithmTemplate matchingBlossom algorithmCanny edge detectorComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)Image processingMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

scene matching algorithm based on edge strength and projection measurement is put forward for the matching and location of multi-source image.In this dissertation,edge detection method is adopted to extract stable features of multi-source image.Besides,four applied edge detection operators including Roberts,Sobel,Laplacian and LOG are analyzed and compared.With the method of projection similarity measurement,four matching algorithms based on edge strength are designed and their performances are analyzed and compared with three classical algorithms,MAD,MSD,and NProd.Experimental results show that edge strength matching algorithms based on Laplasian and LOG operators are more reliable.Moreover,they are simple and easy to be carried out.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.192 · 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