MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4368366765 · doi:10.3390/electronics12092086

E-BiT: Extended Bio-Inspired Texture Descriptor for 2D Texture Analysis and Characterization

2023· article· en· W4368366765 on OpenAlexafffund
Steve Tsham Mpinda Ataky, Alessandro L. Koerich

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceTexture (cosmology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceImage textureSpecies evennessComputer visionImage (mathematics)MathematicsImage processingSpecies richness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an extended bio-inspired texture (E-BiT) descriptor for image texture characterization. The E-BiT descriptor combines global ecological concepts of species diversity, evenness, richness, and taxonomic indexes to effectively capture texture patterns at local and global levels while maintaining invariance to scale, translation, and permutation. First, we pre-processed the images by normalizing and applying geometric transformations to assess the invariance properties of the proposed descriptor. Next, we assessed the performance of the proposed E-BiT descriptor on four datasets, including histopathological images and natural texture images. Finally, we compared it with the original BiT descriptor and other texture descriptors, such as Haralick, GLCM, and LBP. The E-BiT descriptor achieved state-of-the-art texture classification performance, with accuracy improvements ranging from 0.12% to 20% over other descriptors. In addition, the E-BiT descriptor demonstrated its generic nature by performing well in both natural and histopathologic images. Future work could examine the E-BiT descriptor’s behavior at different spatial scales and resolutions to optimize texture property extraction and improve performance.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.505

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesFrench-language works237,207