MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133593670 · doi:10.1109/iccv.1993.378223

Diagonal transforms suffice for color constancy

2002· article· en· W2133593670 on OpenAlexaff
Graham D. Finlayson, Mark S. Drew, Brian Funt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColor constancyDiagonalBasis (linear algebra)Matrix (chemical analysis)MathematicsColor spaceDiagonal matrixSpace (punctuation)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceAlgorithmImage (mathematics)Geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main result is to show that under the conditions imposed by the Maloney-Wandell color constancy algorithm, color constancy can be expressed in terms of a simple independent adjustment of the sensor responses, so long as the sensor space is first transformed to a new basis. The overall goal is to present a theoretical analysis connecting many established theories of color constancy. For the case where surface reflectances are two-dimensional and illuminants are three-dimensional, it is proved that perfect color constancy can always be solved for by an independent adjustment of sensor responses, which means that the color constancy transform can be expressed as a diagonal matrix. In addition to purely theoretical arguments, results from simulations of diagonal-matrix-based color constancy, in which the spectra of real illuminants and reflectances along with the human cone sensitivity functions were used, are presented. The simulations demonstrate that when the cone sensor space is transformed to its new basis in the appropriate manner, a diagonal matrix supports close to optimal color constancy.>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations96
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColor Science and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207