MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802368751 · doi:10.1109/wacv.2018.00200

ByLabel: A Boundary Based Semi-Automatic Image Annotation Tool

2018· article· en· W2802368751 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnnotationBoundary (topology)Computer sciencePixelAutomatic image annotationArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Computer visionEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionPattern recognition (psychology)Image retrievalMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel boundary based semiautomatic tool, ByLabel, for accurate image annotation. Given an image, ByLabel first detects its edge features and computes high quality boundary fragments. Current labeling tools require the human to accurately click on numerous boundary points. ByLabel simplifies this to just selecting among the boundary fragment proposals that ByLabel automatically generates. To evaluate the performance of By-Label, 10 volunteers, with no experiences of annotation, labeled both synthetic and real images. Compared to the commonly used tool LabelMe, ByLabel reduces image-clicks and time by 73% and 56% respectively, while improving the accuracy by 73% (from 1.1 pixel average boundary error to 0.3 pixel). The results show that our ByLabel outperforms the state-of-the-art annotation tool in terms of efficiency, accuracy and user experience. The tool is publicly available: http://webdocs.cs.ualberta.ca/~vis/ bylabel/.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.279 · 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