MCMLSD: A Dynamic Programming Approach to Line Segment Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prior approaches to line segment detection typically involve perceptual grouping in the image domain or global accumulation in the Hough domain. Here we propose a probabilistic algorithm that merges the advantages of both approaches. In a first stage lines are detected using a global probabilistic Hough approach. In the second stage each detected line is analyzed in the image domain to localize the line segments that generated the peak in the Hough map. By limiting search to a line, the distribution of segments over the sequence of points on the line can be modeled as a Markov chain, and a probabilistically optimal labelling can be computed exactly using a standard dynamic programming algorithm, in linear time. The Markov assumption also leads to an intuitive ranking method that uses the local marginal posterior probabilities to estimate the expected number of correctly labelled points on a segment. To assess the resulting Markov Chain Marginal Line Segment Detector (MCMLSD) we develop and apply a novel quantitative evaluation methodology that controls for under-and over-segmentation. Evaluation on the YorkUrbanDB dataset shows that the proposed MCMLSD method outperforms the state-of-the-art by a substantial margin.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".