MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205408563 · doi:10.18280/ts.380605

Synthesis and Comparison of Improved Edge Detection Technique Based on Metaheuristic and Intelligent Algorithm Optimization

2021· article· en· W4205408563 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mourad Moussa, Ali Douik

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaheuristicAnt colony optimization algorithmsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceFuzzy logicEntropy (arrow of time)Image segmentationAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsSegmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The edge is the most significant information in image processing applications. Moreover, and the accurate and continue edge commonly leads to accurate related steps like object tracking and region clustering. In fact, it is the first step of image analysis and understanding. The accuracy edge detection results have an impact on the comprehension machine system. In this paper we present various improved edge detection techniques by our research team, of similar color and grey level images, using the information theory approach based on other energy information inspired from Shannon entropy and utilizing as well the metaheuristic and intelligent method combined with multilevel thresholding approach in various color spaces, and like the ant colony optimization with the graph cut approach for indexing images before the segmentation step. In addition, particular swarm optimization is done, and finally the fuzzy technique is used. The effectiveness and accuracy of these approaches are evaluated by many metric measurements and compared with the common operators. The PR metric, has a significant mean value (about 20) than PR of Canny operator (about 9). And also, we can denote that all improved techniques achieve significant results with ameliorated running time.

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 score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207