MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160307002 · doi:10.18280/ts.380205

A Logarithmic Function-Based Novel Representation Algorithm for Image Classification

2021· article· en· W3160307002 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haiyue Zhang, Daoyun Xu, Yongbin Qin

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Representation (politics)Image (mathematics)Sparse approximationArtificial intelligenceContextual image classificationLogarithmFunction (biology)Property (philosophy)Feature (linguistics)Focus (optics)PixelMathematicsComputer scienceFeature detection (computer vision)SalientFeature extractionAlgorithmImage processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salient feature extraction is an important task in image classification and recognition. Although classification techniques focus on the bright part of an image, many pixels of the image are of similar saliency. To address the issue, this paper proposes the logarithmic function-based novel representation algorithm (LFNR) to apply a novel representation for each image. The original and novel representations were fused to improve the classification accuracy. Experimental results show that, thanks to the simultaneous use of original and novel representations, the test samples could be better classified. The classification algorithms coupled with the LFNR all witnessed lower error rates than the original algorithms. In particular, the collaboration representation-based classification coupled with the LFNR significantly outperformed the other sparse representation algorithms, such as homotopy, primal augmented Lagrangian method (PALM), and sparse reconstruction by separable approximation algorithm (SpaRSA). The no-parameter property of the LFNR is also noteworthy.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207