MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591555609 · doi:10.1109/icci-cc.2016.7862022

Image-to-image face recognition using Dual Linear Regression based Classification and Electoral College voting

2016· article· en· W2591555609 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuan Wang, Liang Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFace (sociological concept)Artificial intelligenceVotingPattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceFacial recognition systemImage (mathematics)Similarity (geometry)Benchmark (surveying)PixelContextual image classificationDual (grammatical number)Computer visionGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an image-to-image face recognition algorithm that uses Dual Linear Regression based Classification (DLRC) and an Electoral College voting approach. Each face image involved is first converted into a cluster of images; each image in the cluster is obtained by shifting the original image a few pixels. The similarity of a pair of face images can be measured by comparing the distance between the corresponding image clusters, which is calculated using DLRC approach. To further improve performance, each cluster of images, representing a single face image, is then partitioned into a union of clusters of sub images. DLRC is then used to measure similarities between corresponding sub-image clusters to provide temporary identity decisions; a voting approach is applied to make final conclusions. We have carried out experiments on a benchmark dataset for face recognition. The result demonstrates that the proposed approach works best in certain simple situations, while its performance is also comparable to known algorithms in complicated situations.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207