Euclidean Distance Versus Manhattan Distance for New Representative SFA Skin Samples for Human Skin Segmentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human color skin image database called SFA, specifically designed to assist research in the area of face recognition, constitutes a very important means particularly for the challenging task of skin detection. It has showed high performances comparing to other existing databases. SFA database provides multiple skin and non-skin samples, which in various combinations with each other allow creating new samples that could be useful and more effective. This particular aspect will be investigated, in the present paper, by creating four new representative skin samples according to the four rules of minimum, maximum, mean and median. The obtained samples will be exploited for the purpose of skin segmentation on the basis of the well-known Euclidean and Manhattan distance metrics. Thereafter, performances of the new representative skin samples versus performances of those skin samples, originally provided by SFA, will be illustrated. Simulation results in both SFA and UTD (University of Texas at Dallas) color face databases indicate that detection rates higher than 92% can be achieved with either measure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".