MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973599829 · doi:10.1109/iri.2019.00034

Texture Image Categorization in Wavelet Domain via Naive Bayes Classifier Based on Laplace and Generalized Gaussian Distribution

2019· article· en· W2973599829 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Azam, Nizar Bouguila

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceLaplace distributionGaussianMathematicsWaveletLaplace transformNaive Bayes classifierGeneralized normal distributionContextual image classificationWavelet transformGaussian processComputer scienceHyperparameterNormal distributionImage (mathematics)Support vector machineStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we have investigated recently proposed feature extraction technique for texture image representation. In the introduced method, features are extracted via bounded Laplace mixture model (BLMM) in wavelet domain. Due to nature of wavelet coefficients that can be modeled accurately with Laplace distribution, it is proposed to apply classifiers based on this distribution, which leads us to introduce Naive Bayes classifier with Laplace distribution for image categorization. The proposed approach is validated through experiments on different texture image datasets and it has shown very good results as compared to the model based on Gaussian distribution. The generalized Gaussian distribution is a generalization of both Laplace and Gaussian distributions, thus we have introduced also Naive Bayes classifier with generalized Gaussian distribution to achieve better performance as compared to the above two models. The proposed approach is also validated through extensive experiments and it is observed that by taking into account the nature of data, proposed models have very good performance. Classification results are presented by different performance metrics to ensure the effectiveness of proposed algorithms in texture image classification.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207