MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1809620427

Invariant Image Improvement by sRGB colour space sharpening

2005· article· en· W1809620427 on OpenAlexaff
Graham D. Finlayson, Mark S. Drew, Cheng Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueUEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSharpeningArtificial intelligenceComputer visionInvariant (physics)MathematicsColor imageColor spaceComputer scienceImage processingImage (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reasoning from image formation, we have shown that there exists a greyscale image – the invariant image – that depends only on the reflectances in the scene. Since illumination dependence is removed, one aspect of the invariant image is that shadows are effectively removed. Moreover, given either a calibration, or clean data with good noise statistics, this invariant is easily found. However, we found that the performance was much poorer on ordinary images that include the typical nonlinear processing in cameras. The contribution of this paper is that we can find a good invariant notwithstanding input image nonlinearities. Our strategy is to follow standard colorimetric procedure and convert image RGBs to the appropriate colour space for our method. We do this by converting first to the linear sRGB colour space and then concatenating conversion to XYZ tristimulus values by a spectral sharpening transform. We handle a suite of images which were intractable to the original method and are now able to find a shadow-free intrinsic reflectance image.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia)Same topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207