MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465792601

Extraction de la forme et de la perspective dans des textures artificielles et des scènes naturelles par modèles corticaux

2006· article· fr· W2465792601 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Corentin Massnt, Jeanny Hérault

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans ce travail nous presentons un nouvel algorithme d'extraction de la forme par la texture applique a l'analyse des scenes naturelles. L'originalite de cette approche est basee sur la structure du cortex visuel primaire (V1) dont elle modelise les fonctions. L'algorithme est capable d'analyser une grande variete de textures presentant differents types d'irregularites. Tout d'abord pour realiser l'echantillonnage du spectre d'amplitude, nous proposons de nouveaux filtres, appeles filtres log-normaux, inspires du fonctionnement des cellules complexes de l'aire V1, en remplacement des filtres de Gabor classiques. Ces filtres s'averent particulierement appropries aux techniques de reconnaissance de forme de part leurs differentes proprietes theoriques, notamment leur profil en frequence radiale (adapte a la decroissance en 1/f des scenes naturelles) et leur separabilite en orientation et en frequence. Nous utilisons ensuite une methode d'estimation de la frequence moyenne locale appliquees sur des signaux naturels. Celle-ci ne necessite pas la recherche d'une echelle adaptee a l'analyse et tire avantage de l'ensemble des frequences du banc de filtres utilise. Finalement, a partir de l'estimation locale, l'orientation et la forme sont extraits en utilisant les proprietes geometriques de la projection perspective. La precision de la methode est evaluee sur differents types de textures, a la fois regulieres et irregulieres, et sur des scenes naturelles. La methode presentee permet d'obtenir des resultats se comparant favorablement aux meilleures techniques existantes tout en conservant un faible cout de calcul. Enfin le modele peut etre adapte a d'autres applications telles que l'analyse de textures, l'extraction de points caracteristiques ou l'indexation d'images par le contenu.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.304 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207