Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41150009›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging2025

Effects of Biases in Geometric and Physics-Based Imaging Attributes on Classification Performance.

Bahman Rouhani, John K Tsotsos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Bahman RouhaniDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada.ORCID 0009-0008-2051-2405
John K TsotsosDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8621-9147

Funding

Air Force Office of Scientific Research FA9550-18-1-0054Air Force Office of Scientific Research FA9550-22-1-0538Canada Research Chairs Program 950-231659Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2016-05352Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada RGPIN-2022-04606
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Learned systems in the domain of visual recognition and cognition impress in part because even though they are trained with datasets many orders of magnitude smaller than the full population of possible images, they exhibit sufficient generalization to be applicable to new and previously unseen data. Since training data sets typically represent such a small sampling of any domain, the possibility of bias in their composition is very real. But what are the limits of generalization given such bias, and up to what point might it be sufficient for a real problem task? There are many types of bias as will be seen, but we focus only on one, selection bias. In vision, image contents are dependent on the physics of vision and geometry of the imaging process and not only on scene contents. How do biases in these factors-that is, non-uniform sample collection across the spectrum of imaging possibilities-affect learning? We address this in two ways. The first is theoretical in the tradition of the Thought Experiment. The point is to use a simple theoretical tool to probe into the bias of data collection to highlight deficiencies that might then deserve extra attention either in data collection or system development. Those theoretical results are then used to motivate practical tests on a new dataset using several existing top classifiers. We report that, both theoretically and empirically, there are some selection biases rooted in the physics and imaging geometry of vision that challenge current methods of classification.

Indexed as

bias in datasetsgeneralizationimaging geometrymachine learningneural networksselection bias

Identifiers

PMID41150009
PMCPMC12564994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.