MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382138553 · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3289759

Reverse Image Search for Collage: A Novel Local Feature-Based Framework

2023· article· en· W4382138553 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Affan Alim, Imran Naseem, Muhammad Mansoor Alam, Mazliham Mohd Su’ud

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale-invariant feature transformComputer scienceAutomatic summarizationSimilarity (geometry)Image (mathematics)Process (computing)Image retrievalFeature (linguistics)The InternetOrb (optics)Artificial intelligenceInformation retrievalPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collage, a popular form of visual-content summarization technique is commonly used by internet users and digital artists. Social media usage is a rising trend that significantly affects the increasing demand for collages. The primary source of collage generation is social media, but other sources also generate it. Searching for a required query image in this corpus is a crucial demand and also valuable. The query image can be retrieved using Reverse Image Search (RIS), either in its exact form or with a small variation. Well-known search engines like Google and Yandex have this functionality, but their method has not been made public. In this research, we propose a consolidated framework for reverse image searching for the problem of collage. Essentially, the local features of collage images are extracted by using SIFT, SURF, and ORB algorithms. These features undergo the localization of the region of interest (ROI) process which handles by binning technique. We propose to use the Manhattan distance to calculate the similarity. The proposed model is extensively evaluated on standard databases and is shown to always have good results using SIFT algorithm. The proposed model is entirely generic and attains 90.96%, accuracy using the SIFT algorithm. The proposed approach is also evaluated on flip and scale variant college and achieves a result of 83% and 78% respectively, using SIFT algorithm.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.334 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207