MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963640979 · doi:10.1109/ist.2013.6729679

Color range determination and alpha matting for color images

2013· article· en· W1963640979 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenyi Luo, Wenyi Wang, Jiying Zhao, Yü Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsRoss Video (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceCluster analysisSegmentationComputer visionMetric (unit)Image segmentationAlpha (finance)Color spaceImage (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a novel matting method is proposed to automatically detect and separate foreground, background and transitional (unknown) regions in a color image. In order to detect the background color, K-means clustering in YC <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">b</sub> C <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">r</sub> color space is firstly used to classify the background colors into a limited number of clusters. Then the spatial information is further used to refine the background and minimize the unknown regions. In this case, an image can be automatically segmented into three hard regions: foreground, background and unknown regions. For transitional (unknown) regions, the alpha matting based on Wang's robust matting algorithm is utilized to refine the accuracy of the separation results. By combining an automatical background determination metric and Wang's robust matting, the proposed matting method can handle images with single-colored or gridded background. The required user input is significantly simplified compared to conventional alpha matting schemes which require users to provide a hard image segmentation manually. The experimental results show that improved matting results can be achieved for complex unknown regions which contain semi-transparent materials or tiny objects such as hair stripes.

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207