A supervised combination strategy for illumination chromaticity estimation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Color constancy is an important perceptual ability of humans to recover the color of objects invariant of light information. It is also necessary for a robust machine vision system. Until now, a number of color constancy algorithms have been proposed in the literature. In particular, the edge-based color constancy uses the edge of an image to estimate light color. It is shown to be a rich framework that can represent many existing illumination estimation solutions with various parameter settings. However, color constancy is an ill-posed problem; every algorithm is always given out under some assumptions and can only produce the best performance when these assumptions are satisfied. In this article, we have investigated a combination strategy relying on the Extreme Learning Machine (ELM) technique that integrates the output of edge-based color constancy with multiple parameters. Experiments on real image data sets show that the proposed method works better than most single-color constancy methods and even some current state-of-the-art color constancy combination strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it