MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953225243 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1612.01594

Object Classification with Joint Projection and Low-rank Dictionary Learning

2016· preprint· en· W2953225243 on OpenAlexaff
Homa Foroughi, Nilanjan Ray, Hong Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2016
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceOutlierRedundancy (engineering)Pattern recognition (psychology)GraphRank (graph theory)Projection (relational algebra)Dictionary learningMachine learningClass (philosophy)Classifier (UML)Data miningSparse approximationMathematicsAlgorithmTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For an object classification system, the most critical obstacles towards real-world applications are often caused by large intra-class variability, arising from different lightings, occlusion and corruption, in limited sample sets. Most methods in the literature would fail when the training samples are heavily occluded, corrupted or have significant illumination or viewpoint variations. Besides, most of the existing methods and especially deep learning-based methods, need large training sets to achieve a satisfactory recognition performance. Although using the pre-trained network on a generic large-scale dataset and fine-tune it to the small-sized target dataset is a widely used technique, this would not help when the content of base and target datasets are very different. To address these issues, we propose a joint projection and low-rank dictionary learning method using dual graph constraints (JP-LRDL). The proposed joint learning method would enable us to learn the features on top of which dictionaries can be better learned, from the data with large intra-class variability. Specifically, a structured class-specific dictionary is learned and the discrimination is further improved by imposing a graph constraint on the coding coefficients, that maximizes the intra-class compactness and inter-class separability. We also enforce low-rank and structural incoherence constraints on sub-dictionaries to make them more compact and robust to variations and outliers and reduce the redundancy among them, respectively. To preserve the intrinsic structure of data and penalize unfavourable relationship among training samples simultaneously, we introduce a projection graph into the framework, which significantly enhances the discriminative ability of the projection matrix and makes the method robust to small-sized and high-dimensional datasets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.114 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207