A Fast Sparse Coding Method for Image Classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Image classification is an important problem in computer vision. The sparse coding spatial pyramid matching (ScSPM) framework is widely used in this field. However, the sparse coding cannot effectively handle very large training sets because of its high computational complexity, and ignoring the mutual dependence among local features results in highly variable sparse codes even for similar features. To overcome the shortcomings of previous sparse coding algorithm, we present an image classification method, which replaces the sparse dictionary with a stable dictionary learned via low computational complexity clustering, more specifically, a k-medoids cluster method optimized by k-means++. The proposed method can reduce the learning complexity and improve the feature’s stability. In the experiments, we compared the effectiveness of our method with the existing ScSPM method and its improved versions. We evaluated our approach on two diverse datasets: Caltech-101 and UIUC-Sports. The results show that our method can increase the accuracy of spatial pyramid matching, which suggests that our method is capable of improving performance of sparse coding 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".