Fusion of transfer learning features and its application in image classification
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Feature fusion methods have been demonstrated to be effective for many computer vision based applications. These methods generally use multiple hand-crafted features. However, in recent days, features extracted through transfer leaning procedures have been proved to be robust than the hand-crafted features in myriad applications, such as object classification and recognition. The transfer learning is a highly appreciated strategy in deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) due to its multifaceted benefits. It heartens us to explore the effect of fusing multiple transfer learning features of different DCNN architectures. Thus, in this work, we extract features of image statistics by exploiting three different pre-trained DCNNs through transfer learning. Then, we transform the features into a generalized subspace through a recently introduced Autoencoder network and fuse them to form intra-class invariant feature vector that is used to train a multi-class Support Vector Machine (SVM). The experimental results on various datasets, including object and action image statistics show that the fusion of multiple transfer learning features improves classification accuracy as compared to fusion of multiple hand-crafted features and usage of single component transfer learning features.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it