MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W92676756 · doi:10.3844/jcssp.2015.127.136

Image Analysis with Legendre Moment Descriptors

2015· article· en· W92676756 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computer Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Retrieval and Classification Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLegendre polynomialsLegendre waveletMoment (physics)Velocity MomentsComputationImage (mathematics)Computer scienceApplied mathematicsSet (abstract data type)Method of moments (probability theory)Associated Legendre polynomialsLegendre transformationLegendre functionMathematicsAlgorithmMathematical analysisZernike polynomialsArtificial intelligencePhysicsOrthogonal polynomialsStatisticsOpticsGegenbauer polynomialsClassical orthogonal polynomialsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: In this research, a numerical integration method is proposed to improve the computational accuracy of Legendre moments. To clarify the improved computation scheme, image reconstructions from higher order of Legendre moments, up to 240, are conducted. With the more accurately generated moments, the distributions of image information in a finite set of Legendre moments are investigated. We have concluded that each individual finite set of Legendre moments will represent the unique image features independently, while the even orders of Legendre moments describe most of the image characteristics.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.240 · 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