MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970076768 · doi:10.1109/tmm.2014.2299515

Illumination Robust Video Foreground Prediction Based on Color Recovering

2014· article· en· W1970076768 on OpenAlexaff
Yanli Wan, Zhenjiang Miao, Xiao–Ping Zhang, Zhen Tang, Zhifei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Multimedia · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionForeground detectionFrame (networking)Optical flowSegmentationPixelBackground subtractionOpacityImage segmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Video foreground prediction is a technique to estimate the probability of each pixel being foreground in current frame based on a foreground segmentation result of its previous frame. Existing foreground prediction algorithms usually assume that the illumination conditions are constant for consecutive frames. Therefore, they cannot predict foreground accurately when the illumination condition changes sharply between video frames. In this paper, a new robust video foreground prediction algorithm is proposed based on color recovering, which is derived based on an observation that the illumination changes are locally smooth. By integrating color recovering with an optical flow estimation algorithm and an opacity propagation algorithm, the negative impact of the illumination changes could be removed. Experimental results show that the proposed algorithm can get more accurate results for videos with illumination changes compared with the existing foreground prediction algorithms.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on MultimediaSame topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207