MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161646182 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3078411

RHN: A Residual Holistic Neural Network for Edge Detection

2021· article· en· W3161646182 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceConvolutional neural networkResidualArtificial intelligenceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge detectionComputational complexity theoryDeep learningArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningImage processingImage (mathematics)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Edge detection plays a very important role in many image processing and computer vision applications. Use of deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) has significantly advanced the performance of image edge detection techniques. Existing DCNN techniques, which make use of residual learning, exhibit a good edge detection performance at the expense of an extremely high computational complexity. There are a few VGG16-based DCNN techniques for edge detection that have been proposed with relatively much lower complexity. In this paper, by using the mechanism of residual learning, a new VGG16-based DCNN technique for edge detection is proposed with a view to provide a performance superior to that provided by other such networks while still preserving their low complexity. The proposed network is experimented on different datasets and is shown to outperform all the other VGG16-based techniques designed to solve the problem of edge detection.

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.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.502
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.237 · 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