Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although a number of elaborate color constancy algorithms have been proposed, methods such as Grey World and Max‐RGB are still widely used because of their low computational costs. The Grey World algorithm is based on the grey world assumption: the average reflectance in a scene is achromatic. But this assumption cannot be always satisfied well. Borrowing on some of the strengths and simplicity of the Grey World algorithm, W. Xiong et al. proposed an advanced illumination estimation method, named Grey Surface Identification (GSI), which identifies those grey surfaces no matter what the light color is and averages them in RGB space. However, this method is camera‐dependent, so it cannot be applied on the images from unknown imaging device. Motivated by the paradigm of the GSI, we present a novel iteration method to identify achromatic surface for illumination estimation. Furthermore, the local Grey Edge method is introduced to optimize the initial condition of the iteration so as to improve the accuracy of the proposed algorithm. The experiment results on different image datasets show that our algorithm is effective and outperforms some current state‐of‐the‐art color constancy algorithms. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Col Res Appl, 2010
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".