MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353100362 · doi:10.18280/ts.400121

Target Area Extraction Algorithm of Infrared Thermal Image Combining Target Detection with Matching Correction

2023· article· en· W4353100362 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dan Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Thermal infraredInfraredImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceExtraction (chemistry)Computer scienceComputer visionPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmThermalMathematicsChemistryOpticsPhysicsChromatographyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infrared thermal image makes the target have certain degree of recognition by reflecting the thermal radiation information emitted by the target, which effectively compensates the information loss of visible light image in harsh imaging environment.Contour extraction effect of target area using traditional Canny algorithm is not good, because the contour gradient change of infrared thermal image target area is not obvious.At the same time, the threshold of most of algorithms needs to be set manually, which is greatly affected by subjective factors, and the image processing efficiency is low.Therefore, this paper studied the target area extraction algorithm of infrared thermal image by combining target detection with matching correction.First, the paper introduced the feature matching algorithm based on grid motion statistics, and converted smoothness constraint of motion into statistics, thus replacing the number of extended feature points with the acquisition of features with better performance and filtering false image matching based on the number of other matching points in the neighborhood of statistical matching points.Second, based on the feature matching results obtained in the previous section, this paper proposed a extraction method of infrared thermal image target area based on thermal feature descriptors, which combined the extracted thermal features with the semantic attributes of each area in the infrared thermal image, thus distinguishing the subtle differences between the infrared thermal image sub-categories.Finally, experimental results verified the effectiveness of the proposed method.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207