MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224306551 · doi:10.1049/cit2.12084

Age estimation from facial images based on Gabor feature fusion and the CIASO‐SA algorithm

2022· article· en· W4224306551 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCAAI Transactions on Intelligence Technology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace recognition and analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceHistogramComputer scienceFeature (linguistics)Simulated annealingFeature selectionAlgorithmChaoticSupport vector machineFace (sociological concept)Facial recognition systemComputer visionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aiming at the problem of long time‐consuming and low accuracy of existing age estimation approaches, a new age estimation method using Gabor feature fusion, and an improved atomic search algorithm for feature selection is proposed. Firstly, texture features of five scales and eight directions in the face region are extracted by Gabor wavelet transform. The statistical histogram is introduced to encode and fuse the directional index with the largest feature value on Gabor scales. Secondly, a new hybrid feature selection algorithm chaotic improved atom search optimisation with simulated annealing (CIASO‐SA) is presented, which is based on an improved atomic search algorithm and the simulated annealing algorithm. Besides, the CIASO‐SA algorithm introduces a chaos mechanism during atomic initialisation, significantly improving the convergence speed and accuracy of the algorithm. Finally, a support vector machine (SVM) is used to get classification results of the age group. To verify the performance of the proposed algorithm, face images with three resolutions in the Adience dataset are tested. Using the Gabor real part fusion feature at 48 × 48 resolution, the average accuracy and 1‐off accuracy of age classification exhibit a maximum of 60.4% and 85.9%, respectively. Obtained results prove the superiority of the proposed algorithm over the state‐of‐the‐art methods, which is of great referential value for application to the mobile terminals.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
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