Texture Image Categorization in Wavelet Domain via Naive Bayes Classifier Based on Laplace and Generalized Gaussian Distribution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".