OW-SLR: Overlapping Windows on Semi-Local Region for Image Super-Resolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been considerable progress in implicit neural representation to upscale an image to any arbitrary resolution. However, existing methods are based on defining a function to predict the Red, Green and Blue (RGB) value from just four specific loci. Relying on just four loci is insufficient as it leads to losing fine details from the neighboring region(s). We show that by taking into account the semi-local region leads to an improvement in performance. In this paper, we propose applying a new technique called Overlapping Windows on Semi-Local Region (OW-SLR) to an image to obtain any arbitrary resolution by taking the coordinates of the semi-local region around a point in the latent space. This extracted detail is used to predict the RGB value of a point. We illustrate the technique by applying the algorithm to the Optical Coherence Tomography-Angiography (OCT-A) images and show that it can upscale them to random resolution. This technique outperforms the existing state-of-the-art methods when applied to the OCT500 dataset. OW-SLR provides better results for classifying healthy and diseased retinal images such as diabetic retinopathy and normals from the given set of OCT-A images.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".