Nature-inspired color-filter array for enhancing the quality of images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study the rendering of images with a new mosaic/color-filter array (CFA) called the Burtoni mosaic. This mosaic is derived from the retina of the African cichlid fish Astatotilapia burtoni. To evaluate the effect of the Burtoni mosaic on the quality of the rendered images, we use two quality measures in the Fourier domain, which are the resolution error and the aliasing error. Conversely to many approaches that use demosaicing algorithms to assess the quality of the reconstruction of images by a CFA, no demosaicing algorithm is used in our model, which makes it independent of such algorithms. We also use 11 semantic sets of color images in order to highlight the image classes that are well fitted for the Burtoni mosaic in the process of image acquisition. We have compared the Burtoni mosaic with the Bayer CFA and with an optimal CFA proposed by Hao et al. Experiments have shown that the Burtoni mosaic gives the best performances for images of nine semantic sets, which are the high frequency, aerial, indoor, face, aquatic, bright, dark, step, and line classes.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".