MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293791135 · doi:10.3390/app12168256

Serial Decoders-Based Auto-Encoders for Image Reconstruction

2022· article· en· W4293791135 on OpenAlexaff
Honggui Li, Maria Trocan, Mohamad Sawan, Dimitri Galayko

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLossless compressionEncoderDecoding methodsArtificial intelligenceResidualIterative reconstructionCascadeAlgorithmImage compressionComputer visionData compressionPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Image processingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Auto-encoders are composed of coding and decoding units; hence, they hold an inherent potential of being used for high-performance data compression and signal-compressed sensing. The main disadvantages of current auto-encoders comprise the following aspects: the research objective is not to achieve lossless data reconstruction but efficient feature representation; the evaluation of data recovery performance is neglected; it is difficult to achieve lossless data reconstruction using pure auto-encoders, even with pure deep learning. This paper aims at performing image reconstruction using auto-encoders, employs cascade decoders-based auto-encoders, perfects the performance of image reconstruction, approaches gradually lossless image recovery, and provides a solid theoretical and applicational basis for auto-encoders-based image compression and compressed sensing. The proposed serial decoders-based auto-encoders include the architectures of multi-level decoders and their related progressive optimization sub-problems. The cascade decoders consist of general decoders, residual decoders, adversarial decoders, and their combinations. The effectiveness of residual cascade decoders for image reconstruction is proven in mathematics. Progressive training can efficiently enhance the quality, stability, and variation of image reconstruction. It has been shown by the experimental results that the proposed auto-encoders outperform classical auto-encoders in the performance of image reconstruction.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207