MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414530651 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.11780

Statistical analysis of multivariate planar curves and applications to X-ray classification

2025· preprint· en· W4414530651 on OpenAlexaff
Issam-Ali Moindjié, Marie-Hélène Descary, Cédric Beaulac

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Object Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Multivariate statisticsTangentPlanarPattern recognition (psychology)SegmentationShape analysis (program analysis)Image segmentation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent developments in computer vision have made segmented images widely available across many domains, such as medicine, where segmented radiographs play an important role in diagnosis. As prediction problems are common in image analysis, this work explores the use of the object contours highlighted by such images as predictors in a supervised classification context. To this end, we develop a new statistical learning framework that accounts for the joint shape of the multiple objects contained in an image. We introduce a formalism that extends the study of a single random planar curve to the joint analysis of several planar curves, referred to as a multivariate planar curve. Modeling the contours jointly, rather than separately, preserves the inter-component information, such as their relative position, scale, and orientation, which is often essential to the analysis. Based on this model, we propose a joint alignment procedure and we extend core inferential tools to multivariate shapes: shape dissimilarity, Fréchet mean estimation, and tangent-space representation. These tangent coordinates are then used as predictors in standard functional classification models. A simulation study shows accurate recovery of deformation parameters over increasing noise levels. Then, through a cardiomegaly detection problem on segmented chest X-rays, we show that jointly modeling the contours is robust to misalignment and improves classification accuracy over both a contour-wise univariate analysis and a naive approach based on the raw curves.

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)0.008
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.288 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venueArXiv.orgSame topicImage and Object Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207