Gabor barcodes for medical image retrieval
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, advances in medical imaging have led to the emergence of massive databases, containing images from a diverse range of modalities. This has significantly heightened the need for automated annotation of the images on one side, and fast and memory-efficient content-based image retrieval systems on the other side. Binary descriptors have recently gained more attention as a potential vehicle to achieve these goals. One of the recently introduced binary descriptors for tagging of medical images are Radon barcodes (RBCs) that are driven from Radon transform via local thresholding. Gabor transform is also a powerful transform to extract texture-based information. Gabor features have exhibited robustness against rotation, scale, and also photometric disturbances, such as illumination changes and image noise in many applications. This paper introduces Gabor Barcodes (GBCs), as a novel framework for the image annotation. To find the most discriminative GBC for a given query image, the effects of employing Gabor filters with different parameters, i.e., different sets of scales and orientations, are investigated, resulting in different barcode lengths and retrieval performances. The proposed method has been evaluated on the IRMA dataset with 193 classes comprising of 12,677 x-ray images for indexing, and 1,733 x-rays images for testing. A total error score as low as 351 (≈ 80% accuracy for the first hit) was achieved.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".