MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317509923 · doi:10.3390/app13031291

Multiscale Analysis for Improving Texture Classification

2023· article· en· W4317509923 on OpenAlexaff
Steve Tsham Mpinda Ataky, Diego Saqui, Jonathan de Matos, Alceu de Souza Britto, Alessandro L. Koerich

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer sciencePyramid (geometry)Texture (cosmology)Image textureImage (mathematics)GaussianFeature (linguistics)Feature vectorComputer visionMathematicsImage processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information from an image occurs over multiple and distinct spatial scales. Image pyramid multiresolution representations are a useful data structure for image analysis and manipulation over a spectrum of spatial scales. This paper employs the Gaussian–Laplacian pyramid to separately treat different spatial frequency bands of a texture. First, we generate three images corresponding to three levels of the Gaussian–Laplacian pyramid for an input image to capture intrinsic details. Then, we aggregate features extracted from gray and color texture images using bioinspired texture descriptors, information-theoretic measures, gray-level co-occurrence matrix feature descriptors, and Haralick statistical feature descriptors into a single feature vector. Such an aggregation aims at producing features that characterize textures to their maximum extent, unlike employing each descriptor separately, which may lose some relevant textural information and reduce the classification performance. The experimental results on texture and histopathologic image datasets have shown the advantages of the proposed method compared to state-of-the-art approaches. Such findings emphasize the importance of multiscale image analysis and corroborate that the descriptors mentioned above are complementary.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207