MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200016772 · doi:10.18280/isi.260603

A SIFT Description Approach for Non-Uniform Illumination and Other Invariants

2021· article· en· W4200016772 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Krittachai Boonsivanon, Worawat Sa-ngiamvibool

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKhon Kaen University
KeywordsScale-invariant feature transformArtificial intelligenceRotation (mathematics)Sensitivity (control systems)Computer visionSet (abstract data type)Moment (physics)Computer scienceImage (mathematics)MathematicsPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new improvement keypoint description technique of image-based recognition for rotation, viewpoint and non-uniform illumination situations is presented. The technique is relatively simple based on two procedures, i.e., the keypoint detection and the keypoint description procedure. The keypoint detection procedure is based on the SIFT approach, Top-Hat filtering, morphological operations and average filtering approach. Where this keypoint detection procedure can segment the targets from uneven illumination particle images. While the keypoint description procedures are described and implemented using the Hu moment invariants. Where the central moments are being unchanged under image translations. The sensitivity, accuracy and precision rate of data sets were evaluated and compared. The data set are provided by color image database with variants uniform and non-uniform illumination, viewpoint and rotation changes. The evaluative results show that the approach is superior to the other SIFTs in terms of uniform illumination, non-uniform illumination and other situations. Additionally, the paper demonstrates the high sensitivity of 100%, high accuracy of 83.33% and high precision rate of 80.00%. Comparisons to other SIFT approaches are also included.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

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 communication0.0000.007
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207