Spring 2010 MATLAB Contest, April 28 - May 5
in [Matlab]
|
Prev: Single number into vector elements
Next: neural network
From: Helen Chen on 5 May 2010 09:14 "Alan Chalker" <alancNOSPAM(a)osc.edu> wrote in message > Also, please note both the stats page and the twitter feed seem to be missing some of the leaders. For example, right now leader 259 is an entry from Yi Cao, and 260 is one of my entries. However, if you look at entry # 4012 submitted by Amitabh Verma, it was in the lead for a while and should be listed as 260. < Thanks Alan. I've forwarded this to Matt to look into. Helen
From: Amitabh Verma on 5 May 2010 09:38 "Helen Chen" <helen.chen(a)mathworks.com> wrote in message <hrrqus$pad$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>... > "Alan Chalker" <alancNOSPAM(a)osc.edu> wrote in message > > > Also, please note both the stats page and the twitter feed seem to be missing some of the leaders. For example, right now leader 259 is an entry from Yi Cao, and 260 is one of my entries. However, if you look at entry # 4012 submitted by Amitabh Verma, it was in the lead for a while and should be listed as 260. < > > Thanks Alan. I've forwarded this to Matt to look into. > > Helen Thanks Alan, for bringing it to notice. Cheers !
From: Nicholas Howe on 5 May 2010 10:38 "Oliver Woodford" <o.j.woodford.98(a)cantab.net> wrote in message <hrrcsu$a3j$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>... > "Robert Macrea" wrote > > A Third Way carries out an initial scan using two rectangular overlapping scans, with the second a grid offset by half a grid width. Between them these scans take up about 80% of the available queries, and they each give a different, coarse version of the image. Every pixel has two estimated values, and if you form a combined image from their means you see an image with pixel blocks half the size of the initial scans. In effect you have faked the resolution you could get with 1.6x the permitted number of scans, which sounds good. In particular it should make smoothing more effective. > > Robert, sounds like we're on the same wavelength here. You are suggesting, in more concrete form, an approach I have suggested a couple of times already. Indeed, my Super Slim entry implements the first stage of just such a method, but using two overlapping scans to get 9 times the resolution rather than your 4. I think it's definitely a winning approach, but like yourself I haven't the time to implement it fully. > > Oliver I've often wished that there was some way to keep separate development threads alive at the same time, so that people could be rewarded for the best block-style solver, the best overlapping solver, etc. There were other contests where I've felt like a really interesting approach never saw the light of day because it was impossible for one person to compete with the combined optimizations of the group. With development on multiple fronts, you might see totally different solvers competing for the lead, and possibly cross-pollination of ideas. But I don't know how you would structure such a contest, without relying on people's subjective judgments that 'this is a X-type of solver". In this contest, I have long wondered if we would see an entry based upon the recent research in compressive sensing. (I suspect that reading about this may have inspired the current competition.) In theory these allow excellent reconstruction of images with many fewer bits than the Nyquist limit would suggest. All the current solvers are essentially limited by Nyquist, so I think a CS solver would win. The queries of such a solver look very different than either the block solver or the periodic solver outlined above. They are essentially random pixel sets from the image. Each one gives you a little information about all the pixels in the image, and you can recover the original by performing a convex optimization via linear programming. Personally I found the research results a little too diverse to condense into a specific contest entry in the amount of time I had, and I was not sure from my reading whether the required computation would even fit into the 3-minute window. But perhaps some other brave soul has succeeded in doing so, and will surprise us all in the final minutes of the contest.
From: Helen Chen on 5 May 2010 11:08 "Alan Chalker" <alancNOSPAM(a)osc.edu> wrote in message > Just to clarify, depending on what your actual meaning of the mini-contest rules is and whats going on with the stats page is likely to determine who the mini-contest winner is. As of right now, the stats page shows the 2 longest entries as mine and then Yi Cao's: > I just heard from Ned and posted his decision on the blog. Helen ps. Time is always the time of submission.
From: Helen Chen on 5 May 2010 12:06
The Contest queue is now officially closed. There are 380 entries in the queue at this point, so after those entries are processed, we will have an answer to our big question - Who is the Grand Prize Winner for this contest! ttys, Helen |