MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122447812 · doi:10.15353/jcvis.v6i1.3533

2D Positional Embedding-based Transformer for Scene Text Recognition

2021· article· en· W3122447812 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Zobeir Raisi, Mohamed A. Naiel, Paul Fieguth, Steven Wardell, John Zelek

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHandwritten Text Recognition Techniques
Canadian institutionsATS Automation Tooling Systems (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsComputer scienceTransformerArtificial intelligenceEncoderEmbeddingLeverage (statistics)ArchitecturePattern recognition (psychology)Text recognitionComputer visionImage (mathematics)EngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent state-of-the-art scene text recognition methods are primarily based on Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs), however, these methods require one-dimensional (1D) features and are not designed for recognizing irregular-text instances due to the loss of spatial information present in the original two-dimensional (2D) images. In this paper, we leverage a Transformer-based architecture for recognizing both regular and irregular text-in-the-wild images. The proposed method takes advantage of using a 2D positional encoder with the Transformer architecture to better preserve the spatial information of 2D image features than previous methods. The experiments on popular benchmarks, including the challenging COCO-Text dataset, demonstrate that the proposed scene text recognition method outperformed the state-of-the-art in most cases, especially on irregular-text recognition.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging SystemsSame topicHandwritten Text Recognition TechniquesFrench-language works237,207