MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551466753 · doi:10.5539/mas.v11n3p13

Innovative Sketch Board Mining for Online image Retrieval

2016· article· en· W2551466753 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Huda Abdulaali Abdul Baqi, Ghazali Sulong, Siti Zaiton Mohd Hashim, Zinah S.Abdul jabar

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia
KeywordsComputer scienceSketchInformation retrievalImage retrievalMetadataMatching (statistics)Precision and recallData miningImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceWorld Wide WebAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing an accurate and efficient Sketch-Based Image Retrieval (SBIR) method in determining the resemblances between the user's query and image stream has been a never-ending quest in digital data communication era. The main challenge is to overcome the asymmetry between a binary sketch and a full-color image. We introduce a unique sketch board mining method to recover the online web images. This image conceptual retrieval is performed by matching the sketch query with the relevant terminology of selected images. A systematic sequence is followed, including the sketch drawing by the user in interpreting its geometrical shape of the conceptual form based on annotation metadata matching technique achieved automatically from Google engines, indexing and clustering the selected images via data mining. The sketch mining board being built in dynamic drawing state used a set of features to generalize sketch board conceptualization in semantic level. Images from the global repository are retrieved via a semantic match of the user's sketch query with them. Excellent retrieval of hand-drawn sketches is found to achieve the recall rate within 0.1 to 0.8 and a precision rate is 0.7 to 0.98. The proposed technique solved many problems that stat-of-art suffered from SBIR (e.g. scaling, transport, imperfect) sketch. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that the proposed technique allowed us to exploit high-level features to search the web effectively and may constitute a basis for efficient and precise image recovery tool.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207