MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973001551 · doi:10.32604/iasc.2020.010100

A Multi-objective Invasive Weed Optimization Method for Segmentation of Distress Images

2020· article· en· W2973001551 on OpenAlexaff
Eslam Mohammed Abdelkader, Osama Moselhi, Mohamed Marzouk, Tarek Zayed

Bibliographic record

VenueIntelligent Automation & Soft Computing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationWeedArtificial intelligenceDistressWeed scienceComputer visionMachine learningEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image segmentation is one of the fundamental stages in computer vision applications. Several meta-heuristics have been applied to solve the segmentation problems by extending the Otsu and entropy functions. However, no single-objective function can optimally handle the diversity of information in images besides the multimodality issues of gray-level images. This paper presents a self-adaptive multi-objective optimization-based method for the detection of crack images in reinforced concrete bridges. The proposed method combines the flexibility of information theory functions in addition to the invasive weed optimization algorithm for bi-level thresholding. The capabilities of the proposed method are demonstrated through comparisons with singleobjective optimization-based methods, conventional segmentation methods, multi-objective genetic algorithm-based method, multi-objective particle swarmbased method and multi-objective harmony search-based method. The proposed method outperformed the previously-mentioned segmentation methods, whereas the average values of mean-squared error, peak signal to noise ratio and structural similarity index are equal to 0.0784, 11.4831 and 0.9921, respectively.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntelligent Automation & Soft ComputingSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207