MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130525912 · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2010.63

Correction of Clipped Pixels in Color Images

2010· article· en· W2130525912 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPixelClipping (morphology)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionBrightnessComputer scienceDistortion (music)SmoothingColor imageMathematicsImage processingImage (mathematics)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional images store a very limited dynamic range of brightness. The true luma in the bright area of such images is often lost due to clipping. When clipping changes the R, G, B color ratios of a pixel, color distortion also occurs. In this paper, we propose an algorithm to enhance both the luma and chroma of the clipped pixels. Our method is based on the strong chroma spatial correlation between clipped pixels and their surrounding unclipped area. After identifying the clipped areas in the image, we partition the clipped areas into regions with similar chroma, and estimate the chroma of each clipped region based on the chroma of its surrounding unclipped region. We correct the clipped R, G, or B color channels based on the estimated chroma and the unclipped color channel(s) of the current pixel. The last step involves smoothing of the boundaries between regions of different clipping scenarios. Both objective and subjective experimental results show that our algorithm is very effective in restoring the color of clipped pixels.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.267 · 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