MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063744373 · doi:10.1109/mwscas.2011.6026420

Contrast enhancement by adaptive mapping function with local information

2011· article· en· W2063744373 on OpenAlexaff
Zohaib Hameed, Chunyan Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive histogram equalizationPixelArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionHistogramClipping (morphology)Contrast (vision)Histogram equalizationImage qualityImage restorationHistogram matchingPattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Image processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Real scenes usually have a wider dynamic range than that of image acquisition devices, which makes most of the image acquired in under/over exposed conditions. Although the existing contrast enhancement algorithms such as contrast limited adaptive histogram equalization (CLAHE) are capable of restoring some of the details degraded in the acquisition, they may fail to detect others. This is mainly due to the complex degradation cases. It is necessary that any new mapping function should be modulated according to the local information. On this line, a new algorithm based on the CLAHE is proposed in this paper. The image quality improvement is focused on the enhancement of the local contrast in an image, in which the signal degradation could result in homogeneous sections in its histogram. It is achieved by discriminative clipping of the pixels based on its intensity levels and redistributing the pixels to maximize the available dynamic range. The contrast enhancement is performed locally based on the information of the local pixels. The clipped pixels are redistributed more assertively near histogram peaks to improve the image quality subjectively with maximum local contrast enhancement. The simulation result shows that the proposed method significantly enhances the image quality.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207