MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240506654 · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2009.5206839

Picking the best DAISY

2009· article· en· W4240506654 on OpenAlexaff
S. Winder, Gang Hua, M. Brown

Bibliographic record

Venue2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDiscriminative modelArtificial intelligenceNormalization (sociology)Scale-invariant feature transformPattern recognition (psychology)ByteComputer visionFeature extraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Local image descriptors that are highly discriminative, computational efficient, and with low storage footprint have long been a dream goal of computer vision research. In this paper, we focus on learning such descriptors, which make use of the DAISY configuration and are simple to compute both sparsely and densely. We develop a new training set of match/non-match image patches which improves on previous work. We test a wide variety of gradient and steerable filter based configurations and optimize over all parameters to obtain low matching errors for the descriptors. We further explore robust normalization, dimension reduction and dynamic range reduction to increase the discriminative power and yet reduce the storage requirement of the learned descriptors. All these enable us to obtain highly efficient local descriptors: e.g, 13.2% error at 13 bytes storage per descriptor, compared with 26.1% error at 128 bytes for SIFT.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations26
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern RecognitionSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207