A comparison of computational color constancy Algorithms. II. Experiments with image data
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
We test a number of the leading computational color constancy algorithms using a comprehensive set of images. These were of 33 different scenes under 11 different sources representative of common illumination conditions. The algorithms studied include two gray world methods, a version of the Retinex method, several variants of Forsyth's gamut-mapping method, Cardei et al.'s neural net method, and Finlayson et al.'s Color by Correlation method. We discuss a number of issues in applying color constancy ideas to image data, and study in depth the effect of different preprocessing strategies. We compare the performance of the algorithms on image data with their performance on synthesized data. All data used for this study are available online at http://www.cs.sfu.ca/(tilde)color/data, and implementations for most of the algorithms are also available (http://www.cs.sfu.ca/(tilde)color/code). Experiments with synthesized data (part one of this paper) suggested that the methods which emphasize the use of the input data statistics, specifically color by correlation and the neural net algorithm, are potentially the most effective at estimating the chromaticity of the scene illuminant. Unfortunately, we were unable to realize comparable performance on real images. Here exploiting pixel intensity proved to be more beneficial than exploiting the details of image chromaticity statistics, and the three-dimensional (3-D) gamut-mapping algorithms gave the best performance.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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