MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improving Deep Features for Image Retrieval Using Multi-Source Spatial Information

2023· article· en· W4385899901 on OpenAlexafffund
Farzad Sabahi, M. Omair Ahmad, M.N.S. Swamy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceResidualFeature (linguistics)Convolutional neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Feature extractionBlock (permutation group theory)Convolution (computer science)Deep learningSpatial analysisAbstractionArtificial neural networkAlgorithmRemote sensingMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The representational quality of the generated feature vectors for images is essential for image retrieval models to achieve high performance. Spatial information is crucial in obtaining highly representative feature vectors for image retrieval, and deep convolutional neural networks provide an excellent framework to generate such features. Through convolutional operations, deep convolutional neural networks include spatial information in the feature maps. However, most available architectures cannot include adequate spatial details in the feature maps required for high-performance image retrieval. Deep residual networks are deep networks capable of including useful information through residual learning. This paper proposes a novel residual block to generate feature maps by focusing on spatial information. The proposed residual block comprises three modules: a spatial feature extraction module, a hierarchical feature extraction module, and a feature fusion module. The first module includes spatial information in the feature maps at different levels of abstraction, while the second module includes spatial information using conventional convolution hierarchy. The third model fuses the outputs of the first two modules to provide a very rich set of feature maps. The present study tests a deep network employing the proposed residual block. The results indicate that the proposed network performs comparably or is superior to state-of-the-art methods on standard benchmarks, thus showing the effectiveness of the proposed residual block in improving the representational capacity.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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