MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410516601 · doi:10.3390/jimaging11050167

Comparing Geodesic Filtering to State-of-the-Art Algorithms: A Comprehensive Study and CUDA Implementation

2025· article· en· W4410516601 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Boulanger, Sadid A. Hasan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeodesicComputer scienceAlgorithmCUDASpeedupNoise (video)Image processingComputationMedian filterCollaborative filteringNoise reductionFilter (signal processing)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionImage (mathematics)Recommender systemMachine learningMathematicsParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comprehensive investigation into advanced image processing using geodesic filtering within a Riemannian manifold framework. We introduce a novel geodesic filtering formulation that uniquely integrates spatial and intensity relationships through minimal path computation, demonstrating significant improvements in edge preservation and noise reduction compared to conventional methods. Our quantitative analysis using peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity index (SSIM) metrics across diverse image types reveals that our approach outperforms traditional techniques in preserving fine details while effectively suppressing both Gaussian and non-Gaussian noise. We developed an automatic parameter optimization methodology that eliminates manual tuning by identifying optimal filtering parameters based on image characteristics. Additionally, we present a highly optimized GPU implementation featuring innovative wave-propagation algorithms and memory access optimization techniques that achieve a 200× speedup, making geodesic filtering practical for real-time applications. Our work bridges the gap between theoretical elegance and computational practicality, establishing geodesic filtering as a superior solution for challenging image processing tasks in fields ranging from medical imaging to remote sensing.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ImagingSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207