Enhanced Canny Algorithm for Image Edge Detection in Print Quality Assessment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The growing demand for high-quality print output in the digital printing era underscores the importance of refining detection algorithms essential for print quality assessment systems.This study focuses on the analysis and optimization of the classical image edge detection algorithm, the Canny algorithm.A novel method is presented, which incorporates an improved adaptive median filter (AMF) for the initial processing of images, resulting in increased efficiency and better handling of noise points.Furthermore, the gradient calculation direction has been expanded, and the threshold has been fine-tuned using an enhanced OTSU algorithm.The optimal threshold selection relies on a preliminary judgement, leading to more comprehensive and accurate image edge information capture.Comparative analysis with the Sobel operator and the traditional Canny edge detection highlights the advantages of the optimized Canny algorithm.This improved approach succeeds in preserving a greater amount of graphical edge information and exhibits a superior ability to identify false edges, significantly increasing detection accuracy.The findings of this study contribute to the development of print quality detection, promoting a more automated, digital, and systematic approach.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it