MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4360989163 · doi:10.18280/ria.370109

Content-Based Image Retrieval Using Adaptive CIE Color Feature Fusion

2023· article· en· W4360989163 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Charulata Palai, Pradeep Kumar Jena, Bonomali Khuntia, Tapas Kumar Mishra, Satya Ranjan Pattanaik

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionContent-based image retrievalImage (mathematics)Information retrievalImage retrievalLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work proposes a novel content-based image retrieval framework using adaptive weight feature fusion in the International Commission on Illumination (CIE) color space.To enhance the weights of the saliency region features of an image, an adaptive wrapper model is proposed for the adaptive feature selection.Initially, the images are transferred to the CIE color space, i.e., the L*, a*, b* color space.The local binary model (LBP) texture features of all four channels are analyzed class-wise.For each class, the weights of the LBP features for a* and b* axis are calculated dynamically as per their class variance.The weighted LBP features along a* and b* axis are merged, which is referred to as the LBPCW feature in the CIE color space.To test the performance of the proposed LBPCW feature we developed a CBIR system, here two standard classifiers i.e.Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Naï ve Bayes (NB) is used for classification and Euclidian distance measure is used for image retrieval.The model is tested with two public datasets Wang-1K and Corel-5K.It is observed that our proposed LBPCW feature outperforms LBP and local binary pattern with saliency map (LBPSM) features.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207