MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045147903 · doi:10.1137/130915406

Total Variation Structured Total Least Squares Method for Image Restoration

2013· article· en· W2045147903 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSIAM Journal on Scientific Computing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical and numerical algorithms
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsTotal variation denoisingImage restorationMinificationRegularization (linguistics)AlgorithmFunction (biology)Image (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationVariation (astronomy)Least-squares function approximationApplied mathematicsPoint spread functionImage processingStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the total variation structured total least squares method for image restoration. In the image restoration problem, the point spread function is corrupted by errors. In the model, we study the objective function by minimizing two variables: the restored image and the estimated error of the point spread function. The proposed objective function consists of the data-fitting term containing these two variables, the magnitude of error and the total variation regularization of the restored image. By making use of the structure of the objective function, an efficient alternating minimization scheme is developed to solve the proposed model. Numerical examples are also presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model and the efficiency of the numerical scheme.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.315 · 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