MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971963694 · doi:10.1109/icip.2011.6116120

Perceptual noise shaping in dual-tree complex wavelet transform for image coding

2011· article· en· W1971963694 on OpenAlexaff
Richard M. Dansereau, Chris Joslin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplex wavelet transformArtificial intelligenceNoise shapingNoise (video)Computer scienceComputer visionCoding (social sciences)PerceptionWaveletWavelet transformImage noiseAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Speech recognitionMathematicsImage (mathematics)Discrete wavelet transformStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we extend the idea of noise shaping for dual-tree complex wavelet transform (DCWT) image coding to a perceptual-based noise shaping. In classical noise shaping, the spatial error information is compensated by adding it back into the whole DCWT domain, which allows the retained to coefficients have better capability to approximate the original image. The proposed perceptual noise shaping introduces a perceptual weight to the spatial errors. The weight involves the structural similarity (SSIM) measurement and other adjustment parameters to shape the spatial errors. Experimental results show that the perceptual noise shaping has better results for visual quality and provides higher SSIM index than classical noise shaping. For example, the proposed perceptual noise shaping achieves an overall SSIM of 0.891 for the 8 bit 512×512 “barbara” compared to 0.878 in classical noise shaping when 5000 coefficients are retained.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207