MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411867027 · doi:10.1109/tase.2025.3584739

Sequential Image Restoration and Segmentation for Interface Detection in Primary Separation Cells

2025· article· en· W4411867027 on OpenAlexafffund
Amir Mohseni, Yousef Salehi, Ranjith Chiplunkar, Biao Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsImage segmentationArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSegmentationComputer scienceSeparation (statistics)Image restorationImage (mathematics)Image processingPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary separation cell (PSC) plays a key role in bitumen recovery during oil sands extraction. Controlling the froth-middling interface level in PSC is vital for optimal bitumen recovery. Existing sensors for the interface level measurement can be either costly or less reliable. This paper introduces an image restoration algorithm to enhance degraded images of PSC sight glasses followed by an image segmentation technique, which can serve as an alternative for interface level estimation. The restoration algorithm uses a regular state-space model with a skew-t distribution for measurement noise to account for image contamination. States and parameters are estimated using an expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm along with a robust Kalman filter (KF). The restored images are segmented using a Gaussian mixture model (GMM) with Markov random fields (MRF) for interface detection. Experimental results on a lab-scale PSC demonstrate the method’s effectiveness in improving interface level estimation compared to the existing models.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automation Science and EngineeringSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207